Cape Town - 2026 ISMRM-ISMRT Annual Meeting and Exhibition
9 May 2026 – 14 May 2026 · Cape Town, South Africa
501-03-005 ISMRM Abstract

Modeling of large-vessel BOLD contributions in Echo-Planar Time-resolved Imaging (EPTI) using subject-specific MR angiography

Primary: Brain Function and fMRI - fMRI Analysis
Secondary: Analysis Methods - Classification and Prediction
501-03-005 · fMRI: Advanced Analysis · Wednesday, 13 May, 1:40 PM–3:30 PM · Hall 1A
Keywords: Angiography Brain fMRI (task based) Modelling EPTI
Accepted
Daniel Haenelt 1,2, Grant Hartung3, Avery Berman4,5, J. Jean Chen6,7, Jian Wu1,2, Berkin Bilgic1,2, Robert Frost1,2, Zijing Dong1,2, Fuyixue Wang1,2, Jonathan R Polimeni8,9
1Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Charlestown, United States of America
2Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States of America
3Institute for Mechanics, Computational Mechanics Group, Technical University of Darmstadt, Darmstadt, Germany
4University of Ottawa Institute of Mental Health Research at The Royal, Ottawa, Canada
5Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada
6Rotman Research Institute at Baycrest, Toronto, Canada
7University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
8Richard M. Lucas Center for Imaging, Stanford University, Stanford, United States of America
9Stanford Medicine, Stanford, United States of America
Presenting Author: Daniel Haenelt

Synopsis

Motivation:
Goals:
Approach:
Results:
Full abstract & presentation

The full text, figures, and any recorded presentation for this abstract are not shown here. Log in if you are a member or registered attendee with access.

Full abstracts, figures, and presentations for Cape Town - 2026 ISMRM-ISMRT Annual Meeting and Exhibition are available to registered attendees. This content becomes freely available to the public roughly two years after the meeting.

To request or purchase access, contact the ISMRM Central Office at info@ismrm.org.

Log in

References

1. Boxerman J L, Hamberg L M, Rosen B R, et al. MR contrast due to intravascular magnetic susceptibility perturbations. MRM 1995;34(4):555-566. doi:10.1002/mrm.1910340412. [doi]
2. Goense J B M, Logothetis N K. Laminar specificity in monkey V1 using high-resolution SE-fMRI. Magn Reson Imaging 2006;24(4):381-392. doi:10.1016/j.mri.2005.12.032. [doi]
3. Huber L, Handwerker D A, Jangraw D C, et al. High-resolution CBV-fMRI allows mapping of laminar activity and connectivity of cortical input and output in human M1. Neuron 2017;96(6):1253-1264.e7. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2017.11.005. [doi]
4. Ivanov D, Gardumi A, Haast R A M, et al. Comparison of 3T and 7T ASL techniques for concurrent functional perfusion and BOLD studies. Neuroimage 2017;156:363-376. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.05.038. [doi]
5. Markuerkiaga I, Barth D, Norris D G. A cortical vascular model for examining the specificity of the laminar BOLD signal. Neuroimage 2016;132:491-498. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.02.073. [doi]
6. Marquardt I, De Weerd P, Schneider M. Feedback contribution to surface motion perception in the human early visual cortex. eLife 2020;9:e50933. doi:10.7554/eLife.50933. [doi]
7. De Hollander G, Van der Zwaag W, Qian C, et al. Ultra-high field fMRI reveals origins of feedforward and feedback activity within laminae of human ocular dominance columns. Neuroimage 2021;228:117683. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.117683. [doi]
8. Gagnon L, Sakadžić S, Lesage F, et al. Quantifying the microvascular origin of BOLD-fMRI from first principles with two-photon microscopy and an oxygen-sensitive nanoprobe. J Neurosci 2015;35(8):3663-3675. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3555-14.2015. [doi]
9. Hartung G, Berman A J L, Sakadžić S, et al. Biophysical simulations of fMRI responses using realistic microvascular models: insights into distinct hemodynamics in humans and mice. bioRxiv 2025. doi:10.1101/2025.10.08.680976. [doi]
10. Arsenovic A, Polimeni J R, Blazejewska A I. Spatial heterogeneity of cerebral cortical-depth response profiles in gradient-echo BOLD fMRI: neuronal or vascular origins? Proceedings of the International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 2025;2340.
11. Blazejewska A I, Gomez D E P, Polimeni J R. Temporal evolution and spatial heterogeneity of cerebral cortical-depth profiles of the BOLD-fMRI response. bioRxiv 2025. doi:10.1101/2025.09.18.677117. [doi]
12. Gordon E, Laumann T O, Gilmore A W, et al. Precision functional mapping of individual human brains. Neuron 2017;95(4):791-807.e7. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2017.07.011. [doi]
13. Zhong X Z, Polimeni J R, Chen J J. Predicting the macrovascular contribution to resting-state fMRI functional connectivity at 3 Tesla: a model-informed approach. Imaging Neurosci 2024;2:imag-2-00315. doi:10.1162/imag_a_00315. [doi]
14. Zhong X Z, Tong Y, Chen J J. Assessment of the macrovascular contribution to resting-state fMRI functional connectivity at 3 Tesla. Imaging Neurosci 2024;20(2):imag-2-00174. doi:10.1162/imag_a_00174. [doi]
15. Bernier M, Pfannmoeller J P, Bollmann S, et al. Modeling the vascular influences on BOLD fMRI using in vivo brain vasculature: incorporating vessel diameter, orientation, and susceptibility. Proceedings of the International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 2021;3397.
16. Wang F, Dong Z, Wald L L, et al. Simultaneous pure T2 and varying T2’-weighted BOLD fMRI using echo planar time-resolved imaging for mapping cortical-depth dependent responses. Neruroimage 2021;245:118641. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2021.118641. [doi]
17. Mareyam A, Kirsch J, Chang Y, et al. A 64-channel 7T array coil for accelerated brain MRI. Proceedings of the International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 2020;0764.
18. Zaretskaya N, Fischl B, Reuter M, et al. Advantages of cortical surface reconstruction using submillimeter 7 T MEMPRAGE. Neuroimage 2018;165:11-26. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.09.060. [doi]
19. Visser F, Zwanenburg J J M, Hoogduin J, et al. High-resolution magnetization-prepared 3D-FLAIR imaging at 7.0 Tesla. MRM 2010;64(1):194-202. doi:10.1002/mrm.22397. [doi]
20. Tisdall M D, Hess A T, Reuter M, et al. Volumetric navigators for prospective motion correction and selective reacquisition in neuroanatomical MRI. MRM 2012;68(2):389-399. doi:10.1002/mrm.23228. [doi]
21. Yulin C, Splitthoff D N, Lo W-C, et al. Accelerated3D EPI navigator for prospective motion correction. Proceedings of the International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 2022;1954.
22. Haenelt D, Polimeni J R, Chang Y, et al. High-resolution 0.16-mm time-of-flight angiography at 7 T with volumetric navigators for prospective motion correction. Proceedings of the International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 2025;0027.
23. Liu T, Spincemaille P, De Rochefort L, et al. Calculation of susceptibility through multiple orientation sampling (COSMOS): a method for conditioning the inverse problem from measured magnetic field map to susceptibility source image in MRI. MRM 2009;61(1):196-204. doi:10.1002/mrm.21828. [doi]
24. Polak D, Chatnuntawech I, Yoon J, et al. Nonlinear dipole inversion (NDI) enables robust quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM). NMR Biomed;33(12):e4271. doi:10.1002/nbm.4271. [doi]
25. Xu M, Ribeiro F L, Barth M, et al. VesselBoost: a python toolbox for small blood vessel segmentation in human magnetic resonance angiography data. Aperture Neuro 2024;4. doi:10.52294/001c.123217. [doi]
26. Bernier M, Cunnane S C, Whittingstall K. The morphology of the human cerebrovascular system. Hum Brain Mapp;39(12):4962-4975. doi:10.1002/hbm.24337. [doi]
27. Greve D N, Fischl B. Accurate and robust brain image alignment using boundary-based registration. Neuroimage 2009;48(1):63-72. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.06.060. [doi]
28. Chaussé J, Berman A J L, Chen J J. BOLDsωimsuite: a new software suite for forward modeling of the BOLD fMRI signal. Imaging Neurosci 2025;3:imag_a_00519. doi:10.1162/imag_a_00519. [doi]
29. Uludağ K, Müller-Bierl B, Uğurbil K. An integrative model for neuronal activity-induced signal changes for gradient and spin echo functional imaging. Neuroimage 2009;48(1):150-165. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.05.051. [doi]
30. Pathak A P, Ward B D, Schmainda K M. A novel technique for modeling susceptibility-based contrast mechanisms for arbitrary microvascular geometries: the finite perturber method. Neuroimage 2008;40(3):1130-1143. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.01.022. [doi]
31. Abid A, Zou J. Contrastive variational autoencoder enhances salient features. arXiv 2019. doi:10.48550/arXiv.1902.04601. [doi]
32. Zhu Y, Aglinskas A, Anzellotti S. DeepCor: denoising fMRI data with contrastive autoencoders. bioRxiv 2023. doi:10.1101/2023.10.31.565011. [doi]

Cite this abstract

http://echo.ismrm.org/p/ISMRM2026/501-03-005