Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Jul 30.
Published in final edited form as: NMR Biomed. 2014 Jan 3;27(3):240–252. doi: 10.1002/nbm.3054

Table 1.

Phantoms employed, as depicted in Fig. 2, with fitted values from region of interest (ROI) evaluations and exchange rates of creatine predicted by water exchange spectroscopy (WEX) studies (39). Fits by a two-pool Bloch–McConnell simulation were performed simultaneously for five Z-spectra obtained with B1 = 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8 and 1.0 µT in each ROI

Phantom/ROI pH [Cr] (mm) [Ag] (%) kb (WEX) (s−1) kb (CEST) (s−1) fb (%) R2b (s−1) R2a (s−1) T1a (s)
0 6.38 55.5 0 35.1 33.8 0.22 40.3 0.60 2.92
A1 6.38 55.5 0.2 35.1 2.47 2.99
A2 6.38 55.5 0.4 35.1 3.57 2.97
A3 6.38 55.5 0.6 35.1 4.82 2.92
A4 6.38 55.5 0.8 35.1 6.23 2.87
A5 6.38 55.5 1.0 35.1 7.58 2.83
F1 6.38 55.5 (1/3) 0 35.1 38.5 0.073 58 0.42 3.00
F2 6.38 55.5·(2/3) 0 35.1 46.5 0.13 53 0.42 2.99
PH1 6.21 55.5 0 23.72 31.6 0.18 49 0.44 2.91
PH2 6.32 55.5 0 30.6 34.8 0.20 48 0.43 2.93
PH3 6.61 55.5 0 59.6 63.0 0.21 54 0.46 2.93

−, missing fitting data when the two-pool model was insufficient.