Alexei V Ouriadov1, Wilfred W Lam, Giles E Santyr. 1. Imaging Research Laboratories, Robarts Research Institute, P.O. Box 5015, 100 Perth Drive, London, ON, N6A 5K8, Canada. ouriadov@imaging.robarts.ca
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this work was to develop a rapid 3-D, variable flip angle (VFA) method for measurement of hyperpolarized (3)He T(1) which accounts for the effects of radiofrequency (RF) pulses without the need for additional flip angle information. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The 3-D, VFA method was validated in vitro over a range of oxygen partial pressures ranging from 0.04 to 0.52 atm. The approach was also tested in vivo in five healthy rats as a function of increasing number of wash-out breaths. The T(1) accuracy of the VFA method in the presence of flip angle mis-setting and RF field non-uniformity was compared with the CFA method using simulations and experiments. RESULTS: T(1) measurements were found to provide p(A)O(2) estimates, both in vitro and in vivo consistent with those predicted based on gas dilution and/or ventilation para- meters. For the RF pulse mis-setting (4%) and RF field non-uniformity (3%) used here, the VFA method provided a T(1) accuracy of better than 5% compared to 12% for the CFA method. CONCLUSION: With sufficient RF field homogeneity (3%) and proper calibration (4%), the VFA approach can provide rapid and reliable 3-D T(1) mapping of hyperpolarized (3)He without the need for additional flip angle information.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this work was to develop a rapid 3-D, variable flip angle (VFA) method for measurement of hyperpolarized (3)He T(1) which accounts for the effects of radiofrequency (RF) pulses without the need for additional flip angle information. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The 3-D, VFA method was validated in vitro over a range of oxygen partial pressures ranging from 0.04 to 0.52 atm. The approach was also tested in vivo in five healthy rats as a function of increasing number of wash-out breaths. The T(1) accuracy of the VFA method in the presence of flip angle mis-setting and RF field non-uniformity was compared with the CFA method using simulations and experiments. RESULTS: T(1) measurements were found to provide p(A)O(2) estimates, both in vitro and in vivo consistent with those predicted based on gas dilution and/or ventilation para- meters. For the RF pulse mis-setting (4%) and RF field non-uniformity (3%) used here, the VFA method provided a T(1) accuracy of better than 5% compared to 12% for the CFA method. CONCLUSION: With sufficient RF field homogeneity (3%) and proper calibration (4%), the VFA approach can provide rapid and reliable 3-D T(1) mapping of hyperpolarized (3)He without the need for additional flip angle information.
Authors: Jim M Wild; Neil Woodhouse; Martyn N J Paley; Stan Fichele; Zead Said; Larry Kasuboski; Edwin J R van Beek Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Jiangsheng Yu; Masaru Ishii; Michelle Law; John M Woodburn; Kiarash Emami; Stephen Kadlecek; Vahid Vahdat; Richard A Guyer; Rahim R Rizi Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: A J Deninger; B Eberle; M Ebert; T Grossmann; W Heil; H Kauczor; L Lauer; K Markstaller; E Otten; J Schmiedeskamp; W Schreiber; R Surkau; M Thelen; N Weiler Journal: J Magn Reson Date: 1999-12 Impact factor: 2.229
Authors: Katarzyna Cieślar; Vasile Stupar; Emmanuelle Canet-Soulas; Sophie Gaillard; Yannick Crémillieux Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2007-02 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Anselm J Deninger; Sven Månsson; J Stefan Petersson; Göran Pettersson; Peter Magnusson; Jonas Svensson; Björn Fridlund; Georg Hansson; Ingrid Erjefeldt; Per Wollmer; Klaes Golman Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2002-08 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Sean B Fain; Frank R Korosec; James H Holmes; Rafael O'Halloran; Ronald L Sorkness; Thomas M Grist Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Peter J Niedbalski; Matthew M Willmering; Scott H Robertson; Matthew S Freeman; Wolfgang Loew; Randy O Giaquinto; Christopher Ireland; Ronald G Pratt; Charles L Dumoulin; Jason C Woods; Zackary I Cleveland Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2019-03-07 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Alexei V Ouriadov; Matthew S Fox; Andras A Lindenmaier; Elaine Stirrat; Hacene Serrai; Giles Santyr Journal: MAGMA Date: 2020-07-06 Impact factor: 2.310
Authors: Hooman Hamedani; Stephen J Kadlecek; Masaru Ishii; Kiarash Emami; Nicholas N Kuzma; Yi Xin; Milton Rossman; Rahim R Rizi Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2013-02-04 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Peter J Niedbalski; Alexander S Cochran; Teckla G Akinyi; Robert P Thomen; Elizabeth M Fugate; Diana M Lindquist; Ronald G Pratt; Zackary I Cleveland Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2020-04-14 Impact factor: 4.044
Authors: Ozkan Doganay; Tahreema N Matin; Anthony Mcintyre; Brian Burns; Rolf F Schulte; Fergus V Gleeson; Daniel Bulte Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2017-09-16 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Geoffrey J Topping; Christian Hundshammer; Luca Nagel; Martin Grashei; Maximilian Aigner; Jason G Skinner; Rolf F Schulte; Franz Schilling Journal: MAGMA Date: 2019-12-06 Impact factor: 2.310