Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Video Articles
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
  • Special Collections
    • AJNR Awards
    • Low-Field MRI
    • Alzheimer Disease
    • ASNR Foundation Special Collection
    • Photon-Counting CT
    • View All
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcasts
    • AJNR SCANtastic
    • Trainee Corner
    • MRI Safety Corner
    • Imaging Protocols
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Submit a Video Article
    • Submit an eLetter to the Editor/Response
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Statistical Tips
    • Fast Publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Author Policies
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Board Alumni
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home

User menu

  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Journal of Neuroradiology
American Journal of Neuroradiology

American Journal of Neuroradiology

ASHNR American Society of Functional Neuroradiology ASHNR American Society of Pediatric Neuroradiology ASSR
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Video Articles
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
  • Special Collections
    • AJNR Awards
    • Low-Field MRI
    • Alzheimer Disease
    • ASNR Foundation Special Collection
    • Photon-Counting CT
    • View All
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcasts
    • AJNR SCANtastic
    • Trainee Corner
    • MRI Safety Corner
    • Imaging Protocols
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Submit a Video Article
    • Submit an eLetter to the Editor/Response
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Statistical Tips
    • Fast Publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Author Policies
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Board Alumni
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home
  • Follow AJNR on Twitter
  • Visit AJNR on Facebook
  • Follow AJNR on Instagram
  • Join AJNR on LinkedIn
  • RSS Feeds

AJNR Awards, New Junior Editors, and more. Read the latest AJNR updates

Research ArticleBRAIN

Phosphorus-31 Brain MR Spectroscopy in Women During and After Pregnancy Compared with Nonpregnant Control Subjects

Anita Holdcroft, Lisa Hall, Gavin Hamilton, Serena J. Counsell, Graeme M. Bydder and Jimmy D. Bell
American Journal of Neuroradiology February 2005, 26 (2) 352-356;
Anita Holdcroft
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Lisa Hall
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Gavin Hamilton
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Serena J. Counsell
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Graeme M. Bydder
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jimmy D. Bell
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: A reversible decrease in brain size has been demonstrated during normal pregnancy that is maximal at term and returns to normal after many months. The purpose of this longitudinal study was to use phosphorus-31 MR spectroscopy to determine if metabolic changes explain this physiologic event.

METHODS: Pregnant women (n = 12) were examined at term and up to 6 months after delivery. Nonpregnant control subjects (n = 7) were imaged twice (a month apart) to exclude hormone effects. Brain 31P MR spectra were acquired at 1.5 T, and intracellular pH was calculated from the chemical shift between phosphocreatine and inorganic phosphate resonances. Statistical analysis was performed by using an analysis of variance.

RESULTS: We found no statistically significant differences in the relative levels of metabolite associated with cerebral bioenergetics and cell membrane metabolism between pregnant women and nonpregnant women. However, a significant increase in cerebral pH was observed in pregnant women at 6 weeks after delivery compared with control subjects (7.074 ± 0.063 vs 7.017 ± 0.041; P < .05). pH returned to normal by 6 months after delivery (7.014 ± 0.010).

CONCLUSION: Changes in brain size associated with pregnancy appear to be associated with an increase in intracellular pH after delivery. The observed alkalosis may reflect altered cellular metabolism. These persistent brain perturbations associated with pregnancy indicate that, when postpartum physiologic and pharmacologic changes are measured, long-term effects may be expected in central nervous system processing.

A reversible decrease in brain size in pregnancy that has a prolonged recovery is reported (1). The normal sequence of change is a progressive decrease in brain size during pregnancy up to the time of delivery, followed by an increase in size for as long as 6 months. A similar sequence, but one of greater magnitude, has been observed in women with mild or severe preeclampsia (1). The changes take months to return to normal after delivery. On quantitation by using contour and thresholding technique (2), highly significant changes occur: The lateral and third ventricular volume increases at term by up to 30%, and brain size decreases by as much as 6% from about 20 weeks of gestation—about the time of placental implantation—and then returns to normal at about 6 months.

Rutherford et al (3) have reported relative cerebral ischemia in preeclampsia compared with healthy pregnancy. The mechanism and functional relevance is speculative and may be related to hormonal (4), vascular (5) and metabolic (6) disturbances. This present study was designed to investigate the metabolic changes that may be part of this normal adaptation to parturition.

Phosphorus-31 MR spectroscopy provides in vivo information about the relative concentrations of neurochemicals, particularly membrane phospholipids and high-energy phosphates (7). Although it has relatively low spatial resolution, our previously reported MR imaging findings (1) of diffuse global changes suggest that this technique is appropriate for defining normal cerebral metabolism and its potential perturbation in parturition. Hence, the aim of this study was to assess changes in brain metabolism by means of in vivo 31P MR spectroscopy in a longitudinal design involving pregnant women and a control group of nonpregnant women.

Methods

Patients and Control Subjects

Approval was obtained from the ethics committee of our institutional review board, and participants provided written informed consent. Pregnant women (n = 12) were scanned at term, at 6 weeks, and (if possible) at 6 months after delivery. For all imaging studies performed during pregnancy, the abdomen and pelvis were positioned with the left side down to avoid occlusion of the inferior vena cava; this position was maintained for the duration of the scan, which was about 30 minutes. Nonpregnant women (n = 7) were included as control subjects; they were scanned twice, a month apart, to exclude sex-hormone-related effects.

31P MR Spectroscopy

31P MR spectra were acquired, as previously described (8). Briefly, all measurements were obtained by using a 1.5-T MR imaging unit (Eclipse; Philips Medical Systems, Cleveland, OH). T1-weighted spin-echo axial MR images were acquired to define the position of the volume of interest. Localized 31P MR spectra (70 × 70 × 70–mm voxel; TR = 10 seconds; 64 signal intensity averages) were acquired by using an image-selected in vivo spectroscopy sequence (9). Figure 1 is an axial image (TR/TE = 646/20) showing typical voxel placement in the brain. Given the large voxel required for 31P MR spectroscopy, no attempt could be made to localize a particular region of the brain.

Fig 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 1.

Axial T1-weighted image (646/20) shows typical placement of the 70 × 70 × 70-mm voxel inside the brain.

Spectra Analysis

A single observer (G.H.) blinded to the clinical status of the subjects analyzed the MR spectra by using prior knowledge in the Algorithm for Magnetic Resonance algorithm (10) included in the Magnetic Resonance User Interface software program (11). Full details of the analysis technique and prior knowledge used to fit the spectra have been previously described (12). Peak areas for phosphomonoester (PME), inorganic phosphate (Pi), phosphodiester (PDE), phosphocreatine (PCr), and three nucleoside triphosphates (NTPs; γ, α, and β) were calculated as a percentage of the total peak areas, or the fraction of the peak area compared with the sum of all the peak areas of all narrow resonances (Table).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup

Results from the spectral analysis

In Vivo pH Calculation

Intracellular pH (pHi) was measured by using the chemical shift difference between the Pi and PCr peaks and the Henderson-Hasselbalch equation in the form published by Petroff et al (13): pHi = 6.77+ log [(A − 3.29)/(5.68 − A)], where A = chemical shift difference in ppm between Pi and PCr (Fig 2).

Fig 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 2.

Localized brain 31P MR spectrum and fit of the data produced by spectral analysis. Arrow indicates the chemical shift between PCr and Pi peaks measured to determine the pHi.

Descriptive and comparative data analysis was performed by using the SPSS software (version 11 for Windows; SPSS, Chicago, IL). We also conducted a one-way analysis of variance using multiple comparisons and post-hoc tests to compare findings in pregnant women with those of the control group.

Results

Twelve pregnant women participated in this study, completing the term and 6 week scans. Three were unavailable for the 6-month scan. All but two were breastfeeding at 6 weeks. The nonpregnant control group consisted of seven age-matched female volunteers. The mean (SD) ages of the women were 33 (4) years in the pregnant and 28 (6) years in the control group; these were not statistically different.

Figure 2 shows a typical brain 31P spectrum from a volunteer. The chemical shift of PCr was set to 0 ppm in accordance with general conventions. Peaks for PME; Pi; PDE; PCr; and γ, α, and β NTP are shown. The three NTP peaks consisted of signals from mainly adenosine triphosphate, although there were contributions from other diphosphate and triphosphate resonances (14). Phospholipid cell membrane precursors, including phosphocholine (PC) and phosphorylethanolamine (PE) and sugar phosphates contributed to the PME resonance, while phospholipid cell membrane degradation products, including glycerophosphorylcholine (GPC) and glycerophosphorylethanolamine (GPE), contributed to the PDE resonance.

The Table shows results from the spectral analysis for the individual phosphates and their ratio. The pregnant women and the control group had no significant differences in the relative levels of any of the cerebral metabolites except for a small, yet significant, increase in brain pHi. One-way unrelated analysis of variance for pH showed a significant effect between the groups (P = .022). A post-hoc analysis using the LSD test for multiple comparisons showed that women who were at 6 weeks after delivery had a higher pHi than that observed all other times (P < .05).

Discussion

During parturition, women are at greater risk of cerebral events than in the nonpregnant state, as a result of medical diseases of pregnancy such as preeclampsia (3) or thromboembolic or other vascular diseases. Their vulnerability to these disorders may be related to underlying changes in physiological characteristics induced by the pregnant state. For example, we have observed that the magnitude of the reversible decreases in brain size during pregnancy is increased in preeclampsia (1). Although the mechanisms for these changes are still speculative, the reporting of ischemic changes during preeclampsia suggests that a metabolic component may have functional importance. The presence and extent of metabolic changes in the brain of pregnant women may be determined noninvasively by using MR spectroscopy.

Previous studies have shown that the postpartum brain increases in size and that the return to prepregnant values is slow, taking months rather than days (1). Several potential mechanisms have been postulated to explain this observation, including the fact that the nutritional needs of the fetus in utero may be met by accessing the maternal tissues stores, including some membrane constituents. Studies of blood concentrations of fatty acids, cholesterol, and phospholipids in mother and baby would test this hypothesis (15). If similar changes in brain cellular composition occur, cell membrane metabolic studies should help to elucidate them. The phospholipid precursor PE and the membrane degradation product GPC are thought to be of particular significance, and they are also major contributors to the PME and PDE signal intensity in the 31P MR spectra of brain, respectively.

We postulated that parturition may induce prolonged brain metabolic perturbations. Our data for control subjects can be compared with MR spectroscopic results of other healthy adults. In a mixed female–male group of 15 volunteers, the mean ± SD values for pH ranged from 7.08 ± 0.04 in the posterior brain to 7.07 ± 0.03 for the whole brain, and no specific regional variations in pH were noted (16). These results are similar to our postpartum values and would have been considered normal had a further time frame not been added to our pregnant group, plus a separate female control group. These additional groups proved that the 6-week follow-up data were not an accurate reflection of normal values.

One of the major difficulties with 31P MR spectroscopic studies is the comparison of results between centers. This particularly affects peak areas; even if variations in pulse sequence design and hardware caused no differences, variations in analytic techniques can produce large discrepancies in these measurements (12). Furthermore, despite the ease of calculation, reported pH values vary greatly, as measured by different groups (17).

One study of brain tumors combined the results of 36 healthy men and women (18). Volumes of interest were centered on the parieto-occipital region of the brain. The mean pH was 7.04, and alkalinization to 7.09 and higher accompanied the findings of patients with brain tumors. This alkalinization was explained by an accumulation of catabolites after cellular proliferation and was considered to result from stimulants (such as vasopressin) activating Na+/H+ exchange. In a study of schizophrenic patients and 19 control subjects (19), values from the frontal lobe in healthy men and women were acidic, with pH means of 6.98 and 6.99, respectively. The other spectra (e.g., PCr and Pi) exhibited sex differences. These differences were considered to provide a basis for sex differences in neuroleptic drug activity, since the changes were not observed in the patients. With regard to the pH results and the different regions of interest used in these studies, the varying percentages of white matter and gray matter might have contributed to the measured differences. Tissues in each regions of interest are not be homogeneous and within tissues, neurons and their supporting structures (astrocytes) maintain different basal pH values of 6.95 and 7.05, respectively (20). These results may explain why different pH values are observed, even in healthy control subjects, and why maintaining a closely defined region of interest is crucial for cross-sectional and longitudinal studies. In our study, the region of interest included the basal ganglia and the posterior parietal region, as these areas are highly susceptible to physiologic alterations (21). The automated computer analysis ensured a high degree of objectivity and reproducibility that was not dependent on observer responses.

Pregnancy is associated with mild alkalemia secondary to hyperventilation contributing to a respiratory alkalosis (22). The blood pH is buffered through renal compensation and decreased bicarbonate levels (23). However, within red blood cells, intracellular acidosis has been demonstrated (24). Thus, oxygen delivery may be facilitated and possibly central nervous system respiratory stimulation. In the brain, other acid-base changes occur during pregnancy; these include an increase in CSF alkalinity with pH values of 7.33 in the third trimester at delivery compared with 7.30 in nonpregnant control subjects (25). Quantitative models to explain these alterations include Stewart’s approach (26). Wolfe et al (27) modernized this computer prediction to include hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA)-axis endocrine control during pregnancy (e.g., vasopressin activity). One of its basic variables is a reduced CSF volume in pregnancy. The usefulness of such models are only as accurate as compartmental size; therefore, the present results not only supports the development of better models but also contributes to improved multicompartmental models for the overall acid-base status in the area of interest. In the future, pHi and extracellular pH may be determined with a refinement in techniques (20).

Large increases in the secretion of sex steroid hormones and the secretion of peptide hormones are unique to childbearing. They can change several aspects of brain function, and metabolic and fluid adjustments may be adaptive to cope with postdelivery behavior. In particular, the role of the HPA axis needs further investigation because it possibly acts as a coordinator (28). The persistence of physiologic changes into the postpartum period corresponds with findings of acid-base balance in parturition and a continuation of the respiratory alkalosis being observed soon after delivery (29). However, its persistence as long as 6 weeks after delivery has not been recorded, to our knowledge. In this present study of lactating and nonlactating women, pHi in the brain tissue was statistically significantly more alkaline at 6 weeks after delivery than during pregnancy or in female controls. pHi is a fundamental parameter in the regulation of energy metabolism and cellular activity. Metabolic changes continued until more than 6 weeks after delivery, and long-term follow-up in the postpartum period with or without lactation is critical to physiologic and pharmacologic observations.

Conclusion

In the healthy parturient and nonpregnant women examined, the only statistically significant metabolic effect measured to relate to changes in brain size was a decrease in intracellular acidosis at 6 weeks after delivery. Although the relative levels of membrane phospholipids did not change significantly, brain changes naturally persistent in the long term.

Acknowledgments

We thank all of the women who took part in this study and traveled long distances for follow-up scans and Muriel Dockendorff por inspiratio. We also thank the MRC for its financial support.

References

  1. ↵
    Oatridge A, Holdcroft A, Saeed N, et al. Change in brain size during and after pregnancy: study in healthy women and women with preeclampsia. AJNR Am J Neuroradiology 2002;23:19–26
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    Saeed N. Magnetic resonance image segmentation using pattern recognition, and applied to image registration and quantitation. NMR Biomed 1998;11:157–167
    CrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    Rutherford JM, Moody A, Crawshaw S, Rubin PC. Magnetic resonance spectroscopy in pre-eclampsia: evidence of cerebral ischaemia. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 2003;110:416–423
  4. ↵
    McEwen B. Estrogen actions throughout the brain. Recent Prog Horm Res 2002;57:357–384
    CrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    Belfort MA, Tooke-Miller C, Allen JC Jr, et al. Changes in flow velocity, resistance indices, and cerebral perfusion pressure in the maternal middle cerebral artery distribution during normal pregnancy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2001;80:104–112
    CrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    Van der Schouw YT, Al MD, Hornstra G, Bulstra-Ramakers MT, Huisjes HJ. Fatty acid composition of serum lipids of mothers and their babies after normal and hypertensive pregnancies. Prostaglandins Leukot Essent Fatty Acids 1991;44:24–52
  7. ↵
    Bottomley PA, Hart HR, Edelstein WA, et al. Anatomy and metabolism of the normal human brain studied by magnetic resonance at 1.5 tesla. Radiology 1984;150:441–446
    PubMed
  8. ↵
    Hamilton G, Mathur R, Allsop JM, et al. Changes in brain intracellular pH and membrane phospholipids on oxygen therapy in hypoxic patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Metab Brain Dis 2003;18:95–109
    PubMed
  9. ↵
    Ordidge RJ, Bowley RM, McHale G. A general approach to selection of multiple cubic volume elements using the ISIS technique. Magn Reson Med 1988;8:323–331
    PubMed
  10. ↵
    Vanhamme L, van den Boogaart A, Van Huffel S. Improved method for accurate and efficient quantification of MRS data with use of prior knowledge. J Magn Reson 1977;129:35–43
  11. ↵
    Naressi A, Couturier C, Devos, JM, et al. Java-based graphical user interface for the MRUI quantitation package. MAGMA 2001;12:141–152
  12. ↵
    Hamilton G, Patel N, Forton DM, Hajnal JV, Taylor-Robinson SD. Prior knowledge for time domain quantification of in vivo brain or liver 31P MR spectra. NMR Biomed 2003;16:168–176
    CrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    Petroff OAC, Pritchard JW, Behar KL, Alger JR, den Hollander JA, Shulman RG. Cerebral intracellular pH by P-31 nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Neurology 1985;35:781–788
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  14. ↵
    Cox IJ. Development and applications of in vivo clinical magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Prog Biophys Mol Biol 1996;65:45–81
    PubMed
  15. ↵
    Rum P, Hornstra G. The n-3 and n-6 polyunsaturated fatty acid composition of plasma phospholipids in pregnant women and their infants. relationship with maternal linoleic acid intake. Clin Chem Lab Med 2002;40:32–39
    CrossRefPubMed
  16. ↵
    Barker PB, Butterworth EJ, Boska MD, Nelson J, Welch KMA. Magnesium and pH imaging of the human brain at 3.0 Tesla. Magn Res Med 1999;41:400–406
    CrossRefPubMed
  17. ↵
    Sijens PE, Dagnelie PC, Halfwerk S, van Dijk P, Wicklow K, Oudkerk M. Understanding the discrepancies between 31P MR spectroscopy assessed liver metabolite concentrations from different institutions. Magn Reson Imaging 1998;16:205–211
    PubMed
  18. ↵
    Maintz D, Heindel W, Kugel H, Jaeger R, Lackner KJ. Phosphorus-31 MR spectroscopy of normal adult human brain and brain tumours. NMR Biomed 2002;15:18–27
    CrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    Riehemann S, Volz HP, Wenda B, et al. Frontal lobe in vivo 31P-MRS reveals gender differences in healthy controls, not in schizophrenics. NMR Biomed 1999;12:483–398
    CrossRefPubMed
  20. ↵
    Kintner DB, Anderson MK, Fitzpatrick JH Jr, Sailor KA, Gilboe DD. 31P-MRS-based determination of brain intracellular and interstitial pH: its application to in vivo H+ compartmentation and cellular regulation during hypoxic/ischaemic conditions. Neurochem Res 2000;25:1385–1396
    CrossRefPubMed
  21. ↵
    Williams EJ, Oatridge A, Holdcroft A, Goldman JM, Bydder GM. Posterior leucoencephalopathy syndrome: cerebral oedema or atrophy? Lancet 1996;347:1556–1557
    CrossRefPubMed
  22. ↵
    Dayal P, Murata Y, Takamura H. Antepartum and postpartum acid-base changes in maternal blood in normal and complicated pregnancies. J Obstet Gynaec Br Cwlth 1972;79:612–624
  23. ↵
    Lucius H, Gahlenbeck H, Kleine HO, Fabel H, Bartels H. Respiratory functions, buffer system, and electrolyte concentrations of blood during human pregnancy. Respir Physiol 1970;9:311–317
    CrossRefPubMed
  24. ↵
    Bardicef O, Bardicef M, Sorokin Y, Cotton DB, Resnick LM. “Physiologic” intracellular acidosis in pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995;173:879–880
    CrossRefPubMed
  25. ↵
    Hirabayashi Y, Shimizu R, Saitoh K, Fukuda H, Igarashi T. Acid-base state of cerebrospinal fluid during pregnancy and its effect on spread of spinal anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth 1996;77:352–355
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  26. ↵
    Stewart PA. Modern quantitative acid-base chemistry. Can J Physiol Pharmacol 1983;61:1444–461
    CrossRefPubMed
  27. ↵
    Wolfe LA, Kemp JG, Heenan AP, Preston RJ, Ohtake PJ. Acid-base regulation and control of ventilation in human pregnancy. Can J Physiol Pharmacol 1998;76:815–827
    CrossRefPubMed
  28. ↵
    Russell JA, Douglas AJ, Ingram CD. Brain preparations for maternity: adaptive changes in behavioural and neuroendocrine systems during pregnancy and lactation—an overview. Progress in Brain Res 2001;133:1–38
    PubMed
  29. ↵
    Machida H. Influence of progesterone on arterial blood and CSF acid-base balance in women. J Appl Physiol 1981;51:1433–1436
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  • Received February 26, 2004.
  • Accepted after revision May 12, 2004.
  • Copyright © American Society of Neuroradiology
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

American Journal of Neuroradiology: 26 (2)
American Journal of Neuroradiology
Vol. 26, Issue 2
1 Feb 2005
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Advertisement
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Journal of Neuroradiology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Phosphorus-31 Brain MR Spectroscopy in Women During and After Pregnancy Compared with Nonpregnant Control Subjects
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Journal of Neuroradiology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Journal of Neuroradiology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Cite this article
Anita Holdcroft, Lisa Hall, Gavin Hamilton, Serena J. Counsell, Graeme M. Bydder, Jimmy D. Bell
Phosphorus-31 Brain MR Spectroscopy in Women During and After Pregnancy Compared with Nonpregnant Control Subjects
American Journal of Neuroradiology Feb 2005, 26 (2) 352-356;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
0 Responses
Respond to this article
Share
Bookmark this article
Phosphorus-31 Brain MR Spectroscopy in Women During and After Pregnancy Compared with Nonpregnant Control Subjects
Anita Holdcroft, Lisa Hall, Gavin Hamilton, Serena J. Counsell, Graeme M. Bydder, Jimmy D. Bell
American Journal of Neuroradiology Feb 2005, 26 (2) 352-356;
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusion
    • Acknowledgments
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Crossref
  • Google Scholar

This article has not yet been cited by articles in journals that are participating in Crossref Cited-by Linking.

More in this TOC Section

  • Multimodal CT Provides Improved Performance for Lacunar Infarct Detection
  • Optimal MRI Sequence for Identifying Occlusion Location in Acute Stroke: Which Value of Time-Resolved Contrast-Enhanced MRA?
  • Evaluating the Effects of White Matter Multiple Sclerosis Lesions on the Volume Estimation of 6 Brain Tissue Segmentation Methods
Show more BRAIN

Similar Articles

Advertisement

Indexed Content

  • Current Issue
  • Accepted Manuscripts
  • Article Preview
  • Past Issues
  • Editorials
  • Editor's Choice
  • Fellows' Journal Club
  • Letters to the Editor
  • Video Articles

Cases

  • Case Collection
  • Archive - Case of the Week
  • Archive - Case of the Month
  • Archive - Classic Case

More from AJNR

  • Trainee Corner
  • Imaging Protocols
  • MRI Safety Corner

Multimedia

  • AJNR Podcasts
  • AJNR Scantastics

Resources

  • Turnaround Time
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Submit a Video Article
  • Submit an eLetter to the Editor/Response
  • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
  • Statistical Tips
  • Fast Publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
  • Graphical Abstract Preparation
  • Imaging Protocol Submission
  • Evidence-Based Medicine Level Guide
  • Publishing Checklists
  • Author Policies
  • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
  • News and Updates

About Us

  • About AJNR
  • Editorial Board
  • Editorial Board Alumni
  • Alerts
  • Permissions
  • Not an AJNR Subscriber? Join Now
  • Advertise with Us
  • Librarian Resources
  • Feedback
  • Terms and Conditions
  • AJNR Editorial Board Alumni

American Society of Neuroradiology

  • Not an ASNR Member? Join Now

© 2025 by the American Society of Neuroradiology All rights, including for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies, are reserved.
Print ISSN: 0195-6108 Online ISSN: 1936-959X

Powered by HighWire