Literature DB >> 23712852

Rapid acquisition of multifrequency, multislice and multidirectional MR elastography data with a fractionally encoded gradient echo sequence.

Philippe Garteiser1, Ramin S Sahebjavaher, Leon C Ter Beek, Septimiu Salcudean, Valérie Vilgrain, Bernard E Van Beers, Ralph Sinkus.   

Abstract

In MR elastography (MRE), periodic tissue motion is phase encoded using motion-encoding gradients synchronized to an externally applied periodic mechanical excitation. Conventional methods result in extended scan time for quality phase images, thus limiting the broad application of MRE in the clinic. For practical scan times, researchers have been relying on one-dimensional or two-dimensional motion-encoding, low-phase sampling and a limited number of slices, and artifact-prone, single-shot, echo planar imaging (EPI) readout. Here, we introduce a rapid multislice pulse sequence capable of three-dimensional motion encoding that is also suitable for simultaneously encoding motion with multiple frequency components. This sequence is based on a gradient-recalled echo (GRE) sequence and exploits the principles of fractional encoding. This GRE MRE pulse sequence was validated as capable of acquiring full three-dimensional motion encoding of isotropic voxels in a large volume within less than a minute. This sequence is suitable for monofrequency and multifrequency MRE experiments. In homogeneous paraffin phantoms, the eXpresso sequence yielded similar storage modulus values as those obtained with conventional methods, although with markedly reduced variances (7.11 ± 0.26 kPa for GRE MRE versus 7.16 ± 1.33 kPa for the conventional spin-echo EPI sequence). The GRE MRE sequence obtained better phase-to-noise ratios than the equivalent spin-echo EPI sequence (matched for identical acquisition time) in both paraffin phantoms and in vivo data in the liver (59.62 ± 11.89 versus 27.86 ± 3.81, 61.49 ± 14.16 versus 24.78 ± 2.48 and 58.23 ± 10.39 versus 23.48 ± 2.91 in the X, Y and Z components, respectively, in the case of liver experiments). Phase-to-noise ratios were similar between GRE MRE used in monofrequency or multifrequency experiments (75.39 ± 14.93 versus 86.13 ± 18.25 at 28 Hz, 71.52 ± 24.74 versus 86.96 ± 30.53 at 56 Hz and 95.60 ± 36.96 versus 61.35 ± 26.25 at 84Hz, respectively).
Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  MR elastography; fractional encoding; gradient echo

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23712852     DOI: 10.1002/nbm.2958

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  NMR Biomed        ISSN: 0952-3480            Impact factor:   4.044


  29 in total

1.  MR Elastography Can Be Used to Measure Brain Stiffness Changes as a Result of Altered Cranial Venous Drainage During Jugular Compression.

Authors:  A Hatt; S Cheng; K Tan; R Sinkus; L E Bilston
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2015-06-04       Impact factor: 3.825

2.  Technical Failure of MR Elastography Examinations of the Liver: Experience from a Large Single-Center Study.

Authors:  Mathilde Wagner; Idoia Corcuera-Solano; Grace Lo; Steven Esses; Joseph Liao; Cecilia Besa; Nelson Chen; Ginu Abraham; Maggie Fung; James S Babb; Richard L Ehman; Bachir Taouli
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2017-01-03       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  In vivo high-resolution magnetic resonance elastography of the uterine corpus and cervix.

Authors:  Xuyuan Jiang; Patrick Asbach; Kaspar-Josche Streitberger; Anke Thomas; Bernd Hamm; Jürgen Braun; Ingolf Sack; Jing Guo
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-07-21       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  K-space data processing for magnetic resonance elastography (MRE).

Authors:  Nadège Corbin; Elodie Breton; Michel de Mathelin; Jonathan Vappou
Journal:  MAGMA       Date:  2016-11-07       Impact factor: 2.310

5.  Tongue stiffness is lower in patients with obstructive sleep apnea during wakefulness compared with matched control subjects.

Authors:  Elizabeth C Brown; Shaokoon Cheng; David K McKenzie; Jane E Butler; Simon C Gandevia; Lynne E Bilston
Journal:  Sleep       Date:  2015-04-01       Impact factor: 5.849

6.  Feasibility and agreement of stiffness measurements using gradient-echo and spin-echo MR elastography sequences in unselected patients undergoing liver MRI.

Authors:  Guilherme Moura Cunha; Kevin J Glaser; Anke Bergman; Rodrigo P Luz; Eduardo H de Figueiredo; Flavia Paiva Proença Lobo Lopes
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2018-05-17       Impact factor: 3.039

7.  MR elastography: high rate of technical success in pediatric and young adult patients.

Authors:  Madalsa Joshi; Jonathan R Dillman; Alexander J Towbin; Suraj D Serai; Andrew T Trout
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2017-04-03

8.  Magnetic Resonance Elastography of the Liver: Qualitative and Quantitative Comparison of Gradient Echo and Spin Echo Echoplanar Imaging Sequences.

Authors:  Mathilde Wagner; Cecilia Besa; Jad Bou Ayache; Temel Kaya Yasar; Octavia Bane; Maggie Fung; Richard L Ehman; Bachir Taouli
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 6.016

Review 9.  Advances in Magnetic Resonance Elastography of Liver.

Authors:  Jiahui Li; Sudhakar Kundapur Venkatesh; Meng Yin
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am       Date:  2020-06-06       Impact factor: 2.266

10.  Rheological determinants for simultaneous staging of hepatic fibrosis and inflammation in patients with chronic liver disease.

Authors:  Ralph Sinkus; Simon Lambert; Khaled Z Abd-Elmoniem; Caryn Morse; Theo Heller; Christian Guenthner; Ahmed M Ghanem; Sverre Holm; Ahmed M Gharib
Journal:  NMR Biomed       Date:  2018-07-30       Impact factor: 4.044

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.