Ouri Cohen1,2, Jonathan R Polimeni1,2,3. 1. Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital, Charlestown, Massachusetts, USA. 2. Department of Radiology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 3. Harvard-MIT Division of Health Sciences and Technology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Demonstrate an optimized multi-inversion echo-planar imaging technique to accelerate quantitative T1 mapping by judicious selection of inversion times for each slice. METHODS: Slice ordering is optimized to maximize discrimination between tissues with different T1 values. The optimized slice orderings are tested in the International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine/National Institute of Standards and Technology phantom and compared with an unoptimized 21-measurement acquisition. The utility of the method is demonstrated in a healthy subject in vivo at 3 T and validated with a gold-standard inversion-recovery sequence. The in vivo precision of our technique was tested by repeated scans of the same subject within a scan session and across scan sessions, occurring 28 days apart. RESULTS: Phantom measurements yielded good agreement (R2 = 0.99) between the T1 estimates from the proposed optimized protocol, reference values from the National Institute of Standards and Technology phantom and gold-standard inversion-recovery values, as well as a negligible estimation bias that was slightly lower than that from the unoptimized 21-measurement protocol (0.74 versus 19 ms). The range of values for the scan-rescan coefficient of variation was 0.86 to 0.93 (within session) and 0.83 to 0.92 (across sessions) across all scan durations tested. CONCLUSIONS: Optimized slice orderings allow faster quantitative T1 mapping. The optimized sequence yielded accurate and precise T1 maps. Magn Reson Med 79:2101-2112, 2018.
PURPOSE: Demonstrate an optimized multi-inversion echo-planar imaging technique to accelerate quantitative T1 mapping by judicious selection of inversion times for each slice. METHODS: Slice ordering is optimized to maximize discrimination between tissues with different T1 values. The optimized slice orderings are tested in the International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine/National Institute of Standards and Technology phantom and compared with an unoptimized 21-measurement acquisition. The utility of the method is demonstrated in a healthy subject in vivo at 3 T and validated with a gold-standard inversion-recovery sequence. The in vivo precision of our technique was tested by repeated scans of the same subject within a scan session and across scan sessions, occurring 28 days apart. RESULTS: Phantom measurements yielded good agreement (R2 = 0.99) between the T1 estimates from the proposed optimized protocol, reference values from the National Institute of Standards and Technology phantom and gold-standard inversion-recovery values, as well as a negligible estimation bias that was slightly lower than that from the unoptimized 21-measurement protocol (0.74 versus 19 ms). The range of values for the scan-rescan coefficient of variation was 0.86 to 0.93 (within session) and 0.83 to 0.92 (across sessions) across all scan durations tested. CONCLUSIONS: Optimized slice orderings allow faster quantitative T1 mapping. The optimized sequence yielded accurate and precise T1 maps. Magn Reson Med 79:2101-2112, 2018.
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: K K Kwong; J W Belliveau; D A Chesler; I E Goldberg; R M Weisskoff; B P Poncelet; D N Kennedy; B E Hoppel; M S Cohen; R Turner Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 1992-06-15 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Steen Moeller; Essa Yacoub; Cheryl A Olman; Edward Auerbach; John Strupp; Noam Harel; Kâmil Uğurbil Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: K K Kwong; D A Chesler; R M Weisskoff; K M Donahue; T L Davis; L Ostergaard; T A Campbell; B R Rosen Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 1995-12 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Jonathan R Polimeni; Himanshu Bhat; Thomas Witzel; Thomas Benner; Thorsten Feiweier; Souheil J Inati; Ville Renvall; Keith Heberlein; Lawrence L Wald Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2015-03-23 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: Berkin Bilgic; Itthi Chatnuntawech; Mary Kate Manhard; Qiyuan Tian; Congyu Liao; Siddharth S Iyer; Stephen F Cauley; Susie Y Huang; Jonathan R Polimeni; Lawrence L Wald; Kawin Setsompop Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2019-05-20 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Ouri Cohen; Shuning Huang; Michael T McMahon; Matthew S Rosen; Christian T Farrar Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2018-05-13 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Sylvain Eminian; Steven David Hajdu; Reto Antoine Meuli; Philippe Maeder; Patric Hagmann Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-06-14 Impact factor: 3.240