biostudies-literatureHupfeld KENIBIB NIH HHSNational Institute on Alcohol Abuse and AlcoholismNIDA NIH HHSNIA NIH HHSNIAAA NIH HHSNational Institute on Drug AbuseNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNational Institute on Aginge5076https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC10947947biostudies-literatureUnknown37(4)Literature values vary widely for within-subject test-retest reproducibility of gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) measured with edited magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS). Reasons for this variation remain unclear. Here, we tested whether three acquisition parameters-(1) sequence complexity (two-experiment MEscher-GArwood Point RESolved Spectroscopy [MEGA-PRESS] vs. four-experiment Hadamard Encoding and Reconstruction of MEGA-Edited Spectroscopy [HERMES]); (2) editing pulse duration (14 vs. 20 ms); and (3) scanner frequency drift (interleaved water referencing [IWR] turned ON vs. OFF)-and two linear combination modeling variations-(1) three different coedited macromolecule models (called "1to1GABA", "1to1GABAsoft", and "3to2MM" in the Osprey software package); and (2) 0.55- versus 0.4-ppm spline baseline knot spacing-affected the within-subject coefficient of variation of GABA + macromolecules (GABA+). We collected edited MRS data from the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex from 20 participants (mean age: 30.8 ± 9.5 years; 10 males). Test and retest scans were separated by removing the participant from the scanner for 5-10 min. Each acquisition consisted of two MEGA-PRESS and two HERMES sequences with editing pulse durations of 14 and 20 ms (referred to here as MEGA-14, MEGA-20, HERMES-14, and HERMES-20; all TE = 80 ms, 224 averages). We identified the best test-retest reproducibility following postprocessing with a composite model of the 0.9- and 3-ppm macromolecules ("3to2MM"); this model performed particularly well for the HERMES data. Furthermore, sparser (0.55- compared with 0.4-ppm) spline baseline knot spacing yielded generally better test-retest reproducibility for GABA+. Replicating our prior results, linear combination modeling in Osprey compared with simple peak fitting in Gannet resulted in substantially better test-retest reproducibility. However, reproducibility did not consistently differ for MEGA-PRESS compared with HERMES, for 14- compared with 20-ms editing pulses, or for IWR-ON versus IWR-OFF. These results highlight the importance of model selection for edited MRS studies of GABA+, particularly for clinical studies that focus on individual patient differences in GABA+ or changes following an intervention.NMR in biomedicineImpact of acquisition and modeling parameters on the test-retest reproducibility of edited GABA.PMC10947947K00AG068440K24 AA030788R01 AA025365K99 AG080084K99AG080084P50 AA010761K00 AG068440R21 EB033516P41 EB031771R00 AG062230R01 EB023963R01 DA054275Murali-Manohar SHui SCNHupfeld KEYedavalli VPrisciandaro JJEdden RAEZollner HJOeltzschner GSong YfalseImpact of acquisition and modeling parameters on the test-retest reproducibility of edited GABA.Literature values vary widely for within-subject test-retest reproducibility of gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) measured with edited magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS). Reasons for this variation remain unclear. Here, we tested whether three acquisition parameters-(1) sequence complexity (two-experiment MEscher-GArwood Point RESolved Spectroscopy [MEGA-PRESS] vs. four-experiment Hadamard Encoding and Reconstruction of MEGA-Edited Spectroscopy [HERMES]); (2) editing pulse duration (14 vs. 20 ms); and (3) scanner frequency drift (interleaved water referencing [IWR] turned ON vs. OFF)-and two linear combination modeling variations-(1) three different coedited macromolecule models (called "1to1GABA", "1to1GABAsoft", and "3to2MM" in the Osprey software package); and (2) 0.55- versus 0.4-ppm spline baseline knot spacing-affected the within-subject coefficient of variation of GABA + macromolecules (GABA+). We collected edited MRS data from the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex from 20 participants (mean age: 30.8 ± 9.5 years; 10 males). Test and retest scans were separated by removing the participant from the scanner for 5-10 min. Each acquisition consisted of two MEGA-PRESS and two HERMES sequences with editing pulse durations of 14 and 20 ms (referred to here as MEGA-14, MEGA-20, HERMES-14, and HERMES-20; all TE = 80 ms, 224 averages). We identified the best test-retest reproducibility following postprocessing with a composite model of the 0.9- and 3-ppm macromolecules ("3to2MM"); this model performed particularly well for the HERMES data. Furthermore, sparser (0.55- compared with 0.4-ppm) spline baseline knot spacing yielded generally better test-retest reproducibility for GABA+. Replicating our prior results, linear combination modeling in Osprey compared with simple peak fitting in Gannet resulted in substantially better test-retest reproducibility. However, reproducibility did not consistently differ for MEGA-PRESS compared with HERMES, for 14- compared with 20-ms editing pulses, or for IWR-ON versus IWR-OFF. These results highlight the importance of model selection for edited MRS studies of GABA+, particularly for clinical studies that focus on individual patient differences in GABA+ or changes following an intervention.2024-01-01T00:00:00Z2024 Apr2025-07-02T03:04:12.745Z2025-07-02T03:04:12.745ZS-EPMC109479473809162810.1002/nbm.5076