Aurelien F Stalder1, Michaela Schmidt1, Harald H Quick2,3, Marc Schlamann4, Stefan Maderwald2, Peter Schmitt1, Qiu Wang5, Mariappan S Nadar5, Michael O Zenge1. 1. Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany. 2. Erwin L. Hahn Institute for MR Imaging, University of Duisburg-Essen, Germany. 3. High Field and Hybrid MR Imaging, University Hospital Essen, Germany. 4. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Hospital Essen, Germany. 5. Siemens Corporate Technology, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To integrate, optimize, and evaluate a three-dimensional (3D) contrast-enhanced sparse MRA technique with iterative reconstruction on a standard clinical MR system. METHODS: Data were acquired using a highly undersampled Cartesian spiral phyllotaxis sampling pattern and reconstructed directly on the MR system with an iterative SENSE technique. Undersampling, regularization, and number of iterations of the reconstruction were optimized and validated based on phantom experiments and patient data. Sparse MRA of the whole head (field of view: 265 × 232 × 179 mm(3) ) was investigated in 10 patient examinations. RESULTS: High-quality images with 30-fold undersampling, resulting in 0.7 mm isotropic resolution within 10 s acquisition, were obtained. After optimization of the regularization factor and of the number of iterations of the reconstruction, it was possible to reconstruct images with excellent quality within six minutes per 3D volume. Initial results of sparse contrast-enhanced MRA (CEMRA) in 10 patients demonstrated high-quality whole-head first-pass MRA for both the arterial and venous contrast phases. CONCLUSION: While sparse MRI techniques have not yet reached clinical routine, this study demonstrates the technical feasibility of high-quality sparse CEMRA of the whole head in a clinical setting. Sparse CEMRA has the potential to become a viable alternative where conventional CEMRA is too slow or does not provide sufficient spatial resolution.
PURPOSE: To integrate, optimize, and evaluate a three-dimensional (3D) contrast-enhanced sparse MRA technique with iterative reconstruction on a standard clinical MR system. METHODS: Data were acquired using a highly undersampled Cartesian spiral phyllotaxis sampling pattern and reconstructed directly on the MR system with an iterative SENSE technique. Undersampling, regularization, and number of iterations of the reconstruction were optimized and validated based on phantom experiments and patient data. Sparse MRA of the whole head (field of view: 265 × 232 × 179 mm(3) ) was investigated in 10 patient examinations. RESULTS: High-quality images with 30-fold undersampling, resulting in 0.7 mm isotropic resolution within 10 s acquisition, were obtained. After optimization of the regularization factor and of the number of iterations of the reconstruction, it was possible to reconstruct images with excellent quality within six minutes per 3D volume. Initial results of sparse contrast-enhanced MRA (CEMRA) in 10 patients demonstrated high-quality whole-head first-pass MRA for both the arterial and venous contrast phases. CONCLUSION: While sparse MRI techniques have not yet reached clinical routine, this study demonstrates the technical feasibility of high-quality sparse CEMRA of the whole head in a clinical setting. Sparse CEMRA has the potential to become a viable alternative where conventional CEMRA is too slow or does not provide sufficient spatial resolution.
Authors: Faysal F Altahawi; Kevin J Blount; Nicholas P Morley; Esther Raithel; Imran M Omar Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2016-10-15 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Jan Fritz; Benjamin Fritz; Gaurav K Thawait; Esther Raithel; Wesley D Gilson; Mathias Nittka; Michael A Mont Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2016-08-06 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Juliane Goebel; Felix Nensa; Bettina Bomas; Haemi P Schemuth; Stefan Maderwald; Marcel Gratz; Harald H Quick; Thomas Schlosser; Kai Nassenstein Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2016-03-09 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Hersh Chandarana; Ankur M Doshi; Alampady Shanbhogue; James S Babb; Mary T Bruno; Tiejun Zhao; Esther Raithel; Michael O Zenge; Guobin Li; Ricardo Otazo Journal: Radiology Date: 2016-03-16 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Mikell Yuhasz; Michael J Hoch; Mari Hagiwara; Mary T Bruno; James S Babb; Esther Raithel; Christoph Forman; Abbas Anwar; J Thomas Roland; Timothy M Shepherd Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2018-12 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Bradley D Allen; Maria L Carr; Michael Markl; Michael O Zenge; Michaela Schmidt; Mariappan S Nadar; Bruce Spottiswoode; Jeremy D Collins; James C Carr Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2018-01-30 Impact factor: 5.315