Filip Szczepankiewicz1,2, Carl-Fredrik Westin1,2, Markus Nilsson3. 1. Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 2. Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 3. Clinical Sciences, Lund, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Diffusion encoding with asymmetric gradient waveforms is appealing because the asymmetry provides superior efficiency. However, concomitant gradients may cause a residual gradient moment at the end of the waveform, which can cause significant signal error and image artifacts. The purpose of this study was to develop an asymmetric waveform designs for tensor-valued diffusion encoding that is not sensitive to concomitant gradients. METHODS: The "Maxwell index" was proposed as a scalar invariant to capture the effect of concomitant gradients. Optimization of "Maxwell-compensated" waveforms was performed in which this index was constrained. Resulting waveforms were compared to waveforms from literature, in terms of the measured and predicted impact of concomitant gradients, by numerical analysis as well as experiments in a phantom and in a healthy human brain. RESULTS: Maxwell-compensated waveforms with Maxwell indices below 100 (mT/m)2 ms showed negligible signal bias in both numerical analysis and experiments. By contrast, several waveforms from literature showed gross signal bias under the same conditions, leading to a signal bias that was large enough to markedly affect parameter maps. Experimental results were accurately predicted by theory. CONCLUSION: Constraining the Maxwell index in the optimization of asymmetric gradient waveforms yields efficient diffusion encoding that negates the effects of concomitant fields while enabling arbitrary shapes of the b-tensor. This waveform design is especially useful in combination with strong gradients, long encoding times, thick slices, simultaneous multi-slice acquisition, and large FOVs.
PURPOSE: Diffusion encoding with asymmetric gradient waveforms is appealing because the asymmetry provides superior efficiency. However, concomitant gradients may cause a residual gradient moment at the end of the waveform, which can cause significant signal error and image artifacts. The purpose of this study was to develop an asymmetric waveform designs for tensor-valued diffusion encoding that is not sensitive to concomitant gradients. METHODS: The "Maxwell index" was proposed as a scalar invariant to capture the effect of concomitant gradients. Optimization of "Maxwell-compensated" waveforms was performed in which this index was constrained. Resulting waveforms were compared to waveforms from literature, in terms of the measured and predicted impact of concomitant gradients, by numerical analysis as well as experiments in a phantom and in a healthy human brain. RESULTS: Maxwell-compensated waveforms with Maxwell indices below 100 (mT/m)2 ms showed negligible signal bias in both numerical analysis and experiments. By contrast, several waveforms from literature showed gross signal bias under the same conditions, leading to a signal bias that was large enough to markedly affect parameter maps. Experimental results were accurately predicted by theory. CONCLUSION: Constraining the Maxwell index in the optimization of asymmetric gradient waveforms yields efficient diffusion encoding that negates the effects of concomitant fields while enabling arbitrary shapes of the b-tensor. This waveform design is especially useful in combination with strong gradients, long encoding times, thick slices, simultaneous multi-slice acquisition, and large FOVs.
Authors: Stefan Klein; Marius Staring; Keelin Murphy; Max A Viergever; Josien P W Pluim Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2009-11-17 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: Björn Lampinen; Filip Szczepankiewicz; Johan Mårtensson; Danielle van Westen; Pia C Sundgren; Markus Nilsson Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2016-11-27 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Filip Szczepankiewicz; Danielle van Westen; Elisabet Englund; Carl-Fredrik Westin; Freddy Ståhlberg; Jimmy Lätt; Pia C Sundgren; Markus Nilsson Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2016-07-20 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Jana Hutter; J Donald Tournier; Anthony N Price; Lucilio Cordero-Grande; Emer J Hughes; Shaihan Malik; Johannes Steinweg; Matteo Bastiani; Stamatios N Sotiropoulos; Saad Jbabdi; Jesper Andersson; A David Edwards; Joseph V Hajnal Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2017-05-30 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Björn Lampinen; Filip Szczepankiewicz; Mikael Novén; Danielle van Westen; Oskar Hansson; Elisabet Englund; Johan Mårtensson; Carl-Fredrik Westin; Markus Nilsson Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2019-02-25 Impact factor: 5.038
Authors: André Ahlgren; Linda Knutsson; Ronnie Wirestam; Markus Nilsson; Freddy Ståhlberg; Daniel Topgaard; Samo Lasič Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2016-03-08 Impact factor: 4.044
Authors: Santiago Coelho; Steven H Baete; Gregory Lemberskiy; Benjamin Ades-Aron; Genevieve Barrol; Jelle Veraart; Dmitry S Novikov; Els Fieremans Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2022-05-08 Impact factor: 7.400
Authors: Björn Lampinen; Filip Szczepankiewicz; Johan Mårtensson; Danielle van Westen; Oskar Hansson; Carl-Fredrik Westin; Markus Nilsson Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2020-03-06 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Markus Nilsson; Greta Eklund; Filip Szczepankiewicz; Mikael Skorpil; Karin Bryskhe; Carl-Fredrik Westin; Claes Lindh; Lennart Blomqvist; Fredrik Jäderling Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2021-05-31 Impact factor: 3.737
Authors: Björn J Langbein; Filip Szczepankiewicz; Carl-Fredrik Westin; Camden Bay; Stephan E Maier; Adam S Kibel; Clare M Tempany; Fiona M Fennessy Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2021-12-01 Impact factor: 6.016