Ruud B van Heeswijk1, Roberto Colotti1, Emeline Darçot1, Jean Delacoste1, Maxime Pellegrin2, Davide Piccini1,3, Diego Hernando4,5. 1. Department of Radiology, University Hospital (CHUV) and University of Lausanne (UNIL), Lausanne, Switzerland. 2. Division of Angiology, Heart and Vessel Department, Lausanne University Hospital (CHUV), Lausanne, Switzerland. 3. Advanced Clinical Imaging Technology, Siemens Healthcare AG, Lausanne, Switzerland. 4. Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison Wisconsin, USA. 5. Department of Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To implement a fluorine-19 (19 F) chemical shift encoding (CSE) approach for the sensitive imaging of molecules with multi-resonance spectra to remove their chemical shift displacement (CSD) artifacts, and to characterize its sensitivity versus established pulse sequences. METHODS: The feasibility of CSE spoiled gradient echo (GRE) and balanced steady-state free precession (bSSFP) was first demonstrated in a phantom study. The dependence of the sensitivity of CSE-bSSFP on several pulse sequence parameters was then established, after which the occurrence of out-of-plane excitation was assessed for 2D and 3D techniques. Next, the sensitivity (in mm-3 s-0.5 ) of both CSE techniques was compared to bSSFP ultrashort echo time (bSSFP-UTE) imaging and multi-chemical-shift-selective turbo spin echo (MCSS-TSE) in a second phantom study. Finally, the sensitivity of the CSE-bSSFP, bSSFP-UTE, and MCSS-TSE pulse sequences was compared in a preliminary in vivo mouse study. RESULTS: Both CSE approaches were successfully implemented and resulted in negligible residual CSD artifacts, while large-volume 3D acquisitions should be considered to reduce problems related to out-of-plane excitation. CSE-bSSFP was shown to have a higher sensitivity than the bSSFP-UTE and MCSS-TSE pulse sequences (15.8 ± 1.3 vs. 11.7 ± 1.0 vs. 13.3 ± 0.9 mm-3 s-0.5 , respectively, P < 0.001), whereas CSE-GRE technique had a lower sensitivity (4.8 ± 1.1 mm-3 s-0.5 ). CONCLUSION: CSE 19 F MR imaging enables the unambiguous visualization of compounds with complex spectra, and provides high sensitivity both in vitro and in vivo. Magn Reson Med 79:2724-2730, 2018.
PURPOSE: To implement a fluorine-19 (19 F) chemical shift encoding (CSE) approach for the sensitive imaging of molecules with multi-resonance spectra to remove their chemical shift displacement (CSD) artifacts, and to characterize its sensitivity versus established pulse sequences. METHODS: The feasibility of CSE spoiled gradient echo (GRE) and balanced steady-state free precession (bSSFP) was first demonstrated in a phantom study. The dependence of the sensitivity of CSE-bSSFP on several pulse sequence parameters was then established, after which the occurrence of out-of-plane excitation was assessed for 2D and 3D techniques. Next, the sensitivity (in mm-3 s-0.5 ) of both CSE techniques was compared to bSSFP ultrashort echo time (bSSFP-UTE) imaging and multi-chemical-shift-selective turbo spin echo (MCSS-TSE) in a second phantom study. Finally, the sensitivity of the CSE-bSSFP, bSSFP-UTE, and MCSS-TSE pulse sequences was compared in a preliminary in vivo mouse study. RESULTS: Both CSE approaches were successfully implemented and resulted in negligible residual CSD artifacts, while large-volume 3D acquisitions should be considered to reduce problems related to out-of-plane excitation. CSE-bSSFP was shown to have a higher sensitivity than the bSSFP-UTE and MCSS-TSE pulse sequences (15.8 ± 1.3 vs. 11.7 ± 1.0 vs. 13.3 ± 0.9 mm-3 s-0.5 , respectively, P < 0.001), whereas CSE-GRE technique had a lower sensitivity (4.8 ± 1.1 mm-3 s-0.5 ). CONCLUSION:CSE 19 F MR imaging enables the unambiguous visualization of compounds with complex spectra, and provides high sensitivity both in vitro and in vivo. Magn Reson Med 79:2724-2730, 2018.
Authors: D Hernando; D C Karampinos; K F King; J P Haldar; S Majumdar; J G Georgiadis; Z-P Liang Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2010-12-08 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Matthew J Goette; Jochen Keupp; Jürgen Rahmer; Gregory M Lanza; Samuel A Wickline; Shelton D Caruthers Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2014-08-27 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Joice Maria Joseph; Maria Rosa Gigliobianco; Bita Mahdavi Firouzabadi; Roberta Censi; Piera Di Martino Journal: Pharmaceutics Date: 2022-02-09 Impact factor: 6.321
Authors: Lawrence M Lechuga; Matthew H Forsberg; Kirsti L Walker; Kai D Ludwig; Christian M Capitini; Sean B Fain Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2021-08-18 Impact factor: 4.044
Authors: Jasper Schoormans; Claudia Calcagno; Mariah R R Daal; Rob C I Wüst; Christopher Faries; Alexander Maier; Abraham J P Teunissen; Sonum Naidu; Brenda L Sanchez-Gaytan; Aart J Nederveen; Zahi A Fayad; Willem J M Mulder; Bram F Coolen; Gustav J Strijkers Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2019-08-23 Impact factor: 4.668