Xing Lu1,2, Yajun Ma1, Eric Y Chang1,3, Qun He1, Adam Searleman1, Annette von Drygalski4, Jiang Du1. 1. Department of Radiology, University of California, San Diego, California, USA. 2. Institute of Electrical Engineering, Chinese Academy of Science, Beijing, China. 3. Radiology Service, VA San Diego Healthcare System, San Diego, California, USA. 4. Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of California, San Diego, California, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the echo dependence of 3D ultrashort echo time (TE) quantitative susceptibility mapping (3D UTE-QSM) and effective transverse relaxation rate ( R2*) measurement in the setting of high concentrations of iron oxide nanoparticles. METHODS: A phantom study with iron concentrations ranging from 2 to 22 mM was performed using a 3D UTE Cones sequence. Simultaneous QSM processing with morphology-enabled dipole inversion (MEDI) and R2* single exponential fitting was conducted offline with the acquired 3D UTE data. The dependence of UTE-QSM and R2* on echo spacing (ΔTE) and first TE (TE1 ) was investigated. RESULTS: A linear relationship was observed between UTE-QSM measurement and iron concentration up to 22 mM only, with the minimal TE1 of 0.032 ms and ΔTE of less than 0.1 ms. A linear relationship was observed between R2* and iron concentration up to 22 mM only when TE1 was less than 0.132 ms and ΔTE was less than 1.2 ms. UTE-QSM with MEDI processing showed strong dependence on ΔTE and TE1 , especially at high iron concentrations. CONCLUSION: UTE-QSM is more sensitive than R2* measurement to TE selection. Both an ultrashort TE1 and a small ΔTE are needed to achieve accurate QSM for high iron concentrations. Magn Reson Med 79:2315-2322, 2018.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the echo dependence of 3D ultrashort echo time (TE) quantitative susceptibility mapping (3D UTE-QSM) and effective transverse relaxation rate ( R2*) measurement in the setting of high concentrations of iron oxide nanoparticles. METHODS: A phantom study with iron concentrations ranging from 2 to 22 mM was performed using a 3D UTE Cones sequence. Simultaneous QSM processing with morphology-enabled dipole inversion (MEDI) and R2* single exponential fitting was conducted offline with the acquired 3D UTE data. The dependence of UTE-QSM and R2* on echo spacing (ΔTE) and first TE (TE1 ) was investigated. RESULTS: A linear relationship was observed between UTE-QSM measurement and iron concentration up to 22 mM only, with the minimal TE1 of 0.032 ms and ΔTE of less than 0.1 ms. A linear relationship was observed between R2* and iron concentration up to 22 mM only when TE1 was less than 0.132 ms and ΔTE was less than 1.2 ms. UTE-QSM with MEDI processing showed strong dependence on ΔTE and TE1 , especially at high iron concentrations. CONCLUSION: UTE-QSM is more sensitive than R2* measurement to TE selection. Both an ultrashort TE1 and a small ΔTE are needed to achieve accurate QSM for high iron concentrations. Magn Reson Med 79:2315-2322, 2018.
Authors: Jiang Du; Michael Carl; Mark Bydder; Atsushi Takahashi; Christine B Chung; Graeme M Bydder Journal: J Magn Reson Date: 2010-09-25 Impact factor: 2.229
Authors: Tapan K Jain; Marco A Morales; Sanjeeb K Sahoo; Diandra L Leslie-Pelecky; Vinod Labhasetwar Journal: Mol Pharm Date: 2005 May-Jun Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Rebecca Kuhlpeter; Hannes Dahnke; Lars Matuszewski; Thorsten Persigehl; Angelika von Wallbrunn; Thomas Allkemper; Walter L Heindel; Tobias Schaeffter; Christoph Bremer Journal: Radiology Date: 2007-09-11 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Hyungseok Jang; Annette von Drygalski; Jonathan Wong; Jenny Y Zhou; Peter Aguero; Xing Lu; Xin Cheng; Scott T Ball; Yajun Ma; Eric Y Chang; Jiang Du Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2020-07-14 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Hyungseok Jang; Xing Lu; Michael Carl; Adam C Searleman; Saeed Jerban; Yajun Ma; Annette von Drygalski; Eric Y Chang; Jiang Du Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2018-10-16 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Kobra Alizadeh; Qin Sun; Tabitha McGuire; Terry Thompson; Frank S Prato; Jim Koropatnick; Neil Gelman; Donna E Goldhawk Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-02-21 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Brooke M Helfer; Vladimir Ponomarev; P Stephen Patrick; Philip J Blower; Alexandra Feitel; Gilbert O Fruhwirth; Shawna Jackman; Lucilia Pereira Mouriès; Margriet V D Z Park; Mangala Srinivas; Daniel J Stuckey; Mya S Thu; Tineke van den Hoorn; Carla A Herberts; William D Shingleton Journal: Cytotherapy Date: 2021-04-06 Impact factor: 6.196
Authors: Aaryani Tipirneni-Sajja; Ralf B Loeffler; Jane S Hankins; Cara Morin; Claudia M Hillenbrand Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2021-02-26 Impact factor: 5.119
Authors: Hyungseok Jang; Michael Carl; Yajun Ma; Adam C Searleman; Saeed Jerban; Eric Y Chang; Jody Corey-Bloom; Jiang Du Journal: Quant Imaging Med Surg Date: 2020-05