Sampada Bhave1, Sajan Goud Lingala2, Casey P Johnson3, Vincent A Magnotta3, Mathews Jacob1. 1. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, The University of Iowa, Iowa, USA. 2. Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Southern California, California, USA. 3. Department of Radiology, The University of Iowa, Iowa, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To introduce a blind compressed sensing (BCS) framework to accelerate multi-parameter MR mapping, and demonstrate its feasibility in high-resolution, whole-brain T1ρ and T2 mapping. METHODS: BCS models the evolution of magnetization at every pixel as a sparse linear combination of bases in a dictionary. Unlike compressed sensing, the dictionary and the sparse coefficients are jointly estimated from undersampled data. Large number of non-orthogonal bases in BCS accounts for more complex signals than low rank representations. The low degree of freedom of BCS, attributed to sparse coefficients, translates to fewer artifacts at high acceleration factors (R). RESULTS: From 2D retrospective undersampling experiments, the mean square errors in T1ρ and T2 maps were observed to be within 0.1% up to R = 10. BCS was observed to be more robust to patient-specific motion as compared to other compressed sensing schemes and resulted in minimal degradation of parameter maps in the presence of motion. Our results suggested that BCS can provide an acceleration factor of 8 in prospective 3D imaging with reasonable reconstructions. CONCLUSION: BCS considerably reduces scan time for multiparameter mapping of the whole brain with minimal artifacts, and is more robust to motion-induced signal changes compared to current compressed sensing and principal component analysis-based techniques.
PURPOSE: To introduce a blind compressed sensing (BCS) framework to accelerate multi-parameter MR mapping, and demonstrate its feasibility in high-resolution, whole-brain T1ρ and T2 mapping. METHODS:BCS models the evolution of magnetization at every pixel as a sparse linear combination of bases in a dictionary. Unlike compressed sensing, the dictionary and the sparse coefficients are jointly estimated from undersampled data. Large number of non-orthogonal bases in BCS accounts for more complex signals than low rank representations. The low degree of freedom of BCS, attributed to sparse coefficients, translates to fewer artifacts at high acceleration factors (R). RESULTS: From 2D retrospective undersampling experiments, the mean square errors in T1ρ and T2 maps were observed to be within 0.1% up to R = 10. BCS was observed to be more robust to patient-specific motion as compared to other compressed sensing schemes and resulted in minimal degradation of parameter maps in the presence of motion. Our results suggested that BCS can provide an acceleration factor of 8 in prospective 3D imaging with reasonable reconstructions. CONCLUSION:BCS considerably reduces scan time for multiparameter mapping of the whole brain with minimal artifacts, and is more robust to motion-induced signal changes compared to current compressed sensing and principal component analysis-based techniques.
Authors: Mark A Griswold; Peter M Jakob; Robin M Heidemann; Mathias Nittka; Vladimir Jellus; Jianmin Wang; Berthold Kiefer; Axel Haase Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Frederike H Petzschner; Irene P Ponce; Martin Blaimer; Peter M Jakob; Felix A Breuer Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2011-03-09 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Philip M Robson; Aaron K Grant; Ananth J Madhuranthakam; Riccardo Lattanzi; Daniel K Sodickson; Charles A McKenzie Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2008-10 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Dan Ma; Vikas Gulani; Nicole Seiberlich; Kecheng Liu; Jeffrey L Sunshine; Jeffrey L Duerk; Mark A Griswold Journal: Nature Date: 2013-03-14 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Jonathan I Tamir; Martin Uecker; Weitian Chen; Peng Lai; Marcus T Alley; Shreyas S Vasanawala; Michael Lustig Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2016-01-20 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Bo Zhao; Kawin Setsompop; Elfar Adalsteinsson; Borjan Gagoski; Huihui Ye; Dan Ma; Yun Jiang; P Ellen Grant; Mark A Griswold; Lawrence L Wald Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2017-04-15 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Huajun She; Joshua S Greer; Shu Zhang; Bian Li; Jochen Keupp; Ananth J Madhuranthakam; Ivan E Dimitrov; Robert E Lenkinski; Elena Vinogradov Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2018-08-26 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Rajiv G Menon; Marcelo V W Zibetti; Rajan Jain; Yulin Ge; Ravinder R Regatte Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2020-11-15 Impact factor: 4.813