Lirong Yan1, Noriko Salamon, Danny J J Wang. 1. Department of Neurology, Laboratory of Functional MRI Technology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to introduce a new noncontrast enhanced 4D dynamic MR angiography (dMRA) technique termed multibolus TrueFISP-based spin tagging with alternating radiofrequency (TrueSTAR). METHODS: Multibolus TrueFISP-based spin tagging with alternating radiofrequency was developed by taking advantage of the phenomenon that the steady-state signal of TrueFISP is minimally disturbed by periodically inserted magnetization preparations (e.g., spin tagging) that are sandwiched by two α/2 RF pulses. Both theoretical analysis and experimental studies were carried out to optimize the proposed method which was compared with both pulsed and pseudo-continuous arterial spin labeling-based dMRA in healthy volunteers. Optimized multibolus dMRA was also applied in a patient with arteriovenous malformation to demonstrate its potential clinical utility. RESULTS: Multibolus dMRA offered a prolonged tagging bolus compared to the standard single-bolus dMRA, and allowed improved visualization of the draining veins in the arteriovenous malformation patient. Compared to pseudo-continuous arterial spin labeling-based dMRA, multibolus dMRA provided visualization of the full passage of the labeled blood with the flexibility for both static and dynamic magnetic resonance angiography. CONCLUSION: By combining the benefits of pulsed and pseudo-continuous arterial spin labeling-based dMRA, multibolus TrueFISP-based spin tagging with alternating radiofrequency can prolong and enhance the tagging bolus without sacrificing imaging speed or temporal resolution.
PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to introduce a new noncontrast enhanced 4D dynamic MR angiography (dMRA) technique termed multibolus TrueFISP-based spin tagging with alternating radiofrequency (TrueSTAR). METHODS: Multibolus TrueFISP-based spin tagging with alternating radiofrequency was developed by taking advantage of the phenomenon that the steady-state signal of TrueFISP is minimally disturbed by periodically inserted magnetization preparations (e.g., spin tagging) that are sandwiched by two α/2 RF pulses. Both theoretical analysis and experimental studies were carried out to optimize the proposed method which was compared with both pulsed and pseudo-continuous arterial spin labeling-based dMRA in healthy volunteers. Optimized multibolus dMRA was also applied in a patient with arteriovenous malformation to demonstrate its potential clinical utility. RESULTS: Multibolus dMRA offered a prolonged tagging bolus compared to the standard single-bolus dMRA, and allowed improved visualization of the draining veins in the arteriovenous malformationpatient. Compared to pseudo-continuous arterial spin labeling-based dMRA, multibolus dMRA provided visualization of the full passage of the labeled blood with the flexibility for both static and dynamic magnetic resonance angiography. CONCLUSION: By combining the benefits of pulsed and pseudo-continuous arterial spin labeling-based dMRA, multibolus TrueFISP-based spin tagging with alternating radiofrequency can prolong and enhance the tagging bolus without sacrificing imaging speed or temporal resolution.
Authors: Michael A Chappell; Mark W Woolrich; Samira Kazan; Peter Jezzard; Stephen J Payne; Bradley J MacIntosh Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2012-04-05 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Huimin Wu; Walter F Block; Patrick A Turski; Charles A Mistretta; Kevin M Johnson Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2012-04-24 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Hee Kwon Song; Lirong Yan; Robert X Smith; Yiqun Xue; Stanislas Rapacchi; Subashini Srinivasan; Daniel B Ennis; Peng Hu; Nader Pouratian; Danny J J Wang Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2013-12-12 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Yuriko Suzuki; Michael Helle; Peter Koken; Marc Van Cauteren; Matthias J P van Osch Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2017-09-14 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Thomas W Okell; Peter Schmitt; Xiaoming Bi; Michael A Chappell; Rob H N Tijssen; Fintan Sheerin; Karla L Miller; Peter Jezzard Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2016-04-13 Impact factor: 4.044