cestsimu app (MathWorks Inc)
Structured Review

Cestsimu App, supplied by MathWorks Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/cestsimu app/product/MathWorks Inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
Images
1) Product Images from "CESTsimu: An open‐source GUI for spectral and spatial CEST simulation"
Article Title: CESTsimu: An open‐source GUI for spectral and spatial CEST simulation
Journal: Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
doi: 10.1002/mrm.30430
Figure Legend Snippet: Layout of CESTsimu GUI, which consists of three modules: “Saturation Settings”, “Exchange Settings”, and “Phantom Settings”.
Techniques Used:
Figure Legend Snippet: Demonstration of the “Phantom Settings” module in CESTsimu. The simulation results are generated with amide concentrations ranging from 0.1 to 0.5 M. (A) 1D average Z‐spectra for all nine phantoms. (B) “Phantom Experiment Setting” window (pops up by clicking the “Exp. setting” button in the “Phantom Settings” module) to define exchange parameters for each phantom. (C) Grayscale Z‐value images at 3.5 ppm. (D) MTR asym color maps at 3.5 ppm. The red solid line in (A) indicates that the frequency offset for (C) and (D) is 3.5 ppm. (E,F) Randomly generated Δ B 0 map (e) and rB 1 map (F).
Techniques Used: Generated
Figure Legend Snippet: Simulation results from CESTsimu with various settings are presented as follows: (A) Z‐spectra with T rec values of 0, 0.2, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0 s, and infinity (which is realized by checking the “Reset init. mag.” checkbox). (B) Z‐spectra with B 1 values of 0.8 μ T , 1.6 μ T , 2.4 μ T , and 3.0 μ T . (C) Z‐spectra with T sat of 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0 s. (D,E) ROI‐averaged Z‐spectra and MTR asym maps (at 2 ppm) with Guan concentrations ranging from 0 to 100 mM in 12.5 mM increments. (F,G) ROI‐averaged Z‐spectra and MTR asym maps (at 2 ppm) with Guan exchange rates ranging from 200 to 1000 Hz in 100 Hz increments.
Techniques Used:
Figure Legend Snippet: Δ B 0 and rB 1 maps simulated by CESTsimu (A,D) and measured using WASABI (B,E), along with the Bland‐Altman plot comparing B 0 and B 1 values from CESTsimu and WASABI (C,F).
Techniques Used:
Figure Legend Snippet: Simulation results on BMsim challenge Cases 1–4 obtained by CESTsimu and Pulseq‐CEST. (A) Amide proton transfer (APT) steady‐state preparation. (B,C) APT transient‐state preparation. (D) WASABI preparation.
Techniques Used:
Figure Legend Snippet: Simulation results on BMsim challenge Cases 5–8 obtained by CESTsimu and Pulseq‐CEST. (A) Single‐shaped pulse APT preparation. (B,C) Pulsed APT preparation. (D) WASABI preparation.
Techniques Used: