J R Reichenbach1,2, F Schweser3,4, B Serres1, A Deistung5. 1. Medical Physics Group, Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Jena, Friedrich-Schiller University, Philosophenweg 3, 07743, Jena, Germany. juergen.reichenbach@med.uni-jena.de. 2. Michael Stifel Center for Data-driven and Simulation Science Jena, Friedrich Schiller University, Jena, Germany. juergen.reichenbach@med.uni-jena.de. 3. Buffalo Neuroimaging Analysis Center, Department of Neurology, School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA. 4. MRI Clinical and Translational Research Center, School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA. 5. Medical Physics Group, Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Jena, Friedrich-Schiller University, Philosophenweg 3, 07743, Jena, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To review the fundamental principles of susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI) and quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM), and to discuss recent clinical developments. METHODS: SWI is a magnetic resonance imaging method that takes advantage of magnitude signal loss and phase information to reveal anatomic and physiologic information about tissue and venous vasculature. The method enhances image contrast qualitatively, relying on phase shifts due to differences in magnetic susceptibility between tissues. QSM, extending SWI in an elegant way, is a new sophisticated postprocessing technique that numerically solves the inverse source-effect problem to derive local tissue magnetic susceptibility (source) from the measured magnetic field distribution (effect) as it is reflected in the phase images of gradient-echo sequences. RESULTS: SWI has meanwhile been established in numerous clinical as well as basic biomedical applications due to its ability to highlight tissue structures and compounds that are difficult to detect by conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), including iron, calcifications, small veins, blood, and bones. The field of QSM has also progressed rapidly, both in terms of optimizing the post-processing strategies and algorithms as well as in gaining ground for new clinical applications that take advantage of its quantitative nature and improved specificity to identify the magnetic signature of lesions. CONCLUSIONS: Though magnetic susceptibility may be a major nuisance producing image artifacts in MRI, recent work has transformed it into a useful source of image contrast. Both SWI and QSM are gaining increasing acceptance in clinical practice. In particular, QSM provides new insights into tissue composition and organization due to its more direct relation to the actual physical tissue magnetic properties.
PURPOSE: To review the fundamental principles of susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI) and quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM), and to discuss recent clinical developments. METHODS: SWI is a magnetic resonance imaging method that takes advantage of magnitude signal loss and phase information to reveal anatomic and physiologic information about tissue and venous vasculature. The method enhances image contrast qualitatively, relying on phase shifts due to differences in magnetic susceptibility between tissues. QSM, extending SWI in an elegant way, is a new sophisticated postprocessing technique that numerically solves the inverse source-effect problem to derive local tissue magnetic susceptibility (source) from the measured magnetic field distribution (effect) as it is reflected in the phase images of gradient-echo sequences. RESULTS: SWI has meanwhile been established in numerous clinical as well as basic biomedical applications due to its ability to highlight tissue structures and compounds that are difficult to detect by conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), including iron, calcifications, small veins, blood, and bones. The field of QSM has also progressed rapidly, both in terms of optimizing the post-processing strategies and algorithms as well as in gaining ground for new clinical applications that take advantage of its quantitative nature and improved specificity to identify the magnetic signature of lesions. CONCLUSIONS: Though magnetic susceptibility may be a major nuisance producing image artifacts in MRI, recent work has transformed it into a useful source of image contrast. Both SWI and QSM are gaining increasing acceptance in clinical practice. In particular, QSM provides new insights into tissue composition and organization due to its more direct relation to the actual physical tissue magnetic properties.
Entities:
Keywords:
Magnetic resonance imaging; Magnetic susceptibility; Quantitative susceptibility mapping; Susceptibility-weighted imaging
Authors: Andreas Deistung; Alexander Rauscher; Jan Sedlacik; Jörg Stadler; Stephan Witoszynskyj; Jürgen R Reichenbach Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Audrey P Fan; Berkin Bilgic; Louis Gagnon; Thomas Witzel; Himanshu Bhat; Bruce R Rosen; Elfar Adalsteinsson Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2013-09-04 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Tian Liu; Jing Liu; Ludovic de Rochefort; Pascal Spincemaille; Ildar Khalidov; James Robert Ledoux; Yi Wang Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2011-04-04 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Christian Langkammer; Kristian Bredies; Benedikt A Poser; Markus Barth; Gernot Reishofer; Audrey Peiwen Fan; Berkin Bilgic; Franz Fazekas; Caterina Mainero; Stefan Ropele Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2015-02-27 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Zhe Liu; Yan Wen; Pascal Spincemaille; Shun Zhang; Yihao Yao; Thanh D Nguyen; Yi Wang Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2019-08-11 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Salil Soman; Jose A Bregni; Berkin Bilgic; Ursula Nemec; Audrey Fan; Zhe Liu; Robert L Barry; Jiang Du; Keith Main; Jerome Yesavage; Maheen M Adamson; Michael Moseley; Yi Wang Journal: Curr Radiol Rep Date: 2017-02-14
Authors: Yi Wang; Pascal Spincemaille; Zhe Liu; Alexey Dimov; Kofi Deh; Jianqi Li; Yan Zhang; Yihao Yao; Kelly M Gillen; Alan H Wilman; Ajay Gupta; Apostolos John Tsiouris; Ilhami Kovanlikaya; Gloria Chia-Yi Chiang; Jonathan W Weinsaft; Lawrence Tanenbaum; Weiwei Chen; Wenzhen Zhu; Shixin Chang; Min Lou; Brian H Kopell; Michael G Kaplitt; David Devos; Toshinori Hirai; Xuemei Huang; Yukunori Korogi; Alexander Shtilbans; Geon-Ho Jahng; Daniel Pelletier; Susan A Gauthier; David Pitt; Ashley I Bush; Gary M Brittenham; Martin R Prince Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2017-03-10 Impact factor: 4.813