Literature DB >> 32738103

Comparison of parameter optimization methods for quantitative susceptibility mapping.

Carlos Milovic1,2,3, Claudia Prieto1,4, Berkin Bilgic5,6,7, Sergio Uribe2,3,8, Julio Acosta-Cabronero9, Pablo Irarrazaval1,2,3,10, Cristian Tejos1,2,3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping (QSM) is usually performed by minimizing a functional with data fidelity and regularization terms. A weighting parameter controls the balance between these terms. There is a need for techniques to find the proper balance that avoids artifact propagation and loss of details. Finding the point of maximum curvature in the L-curve is a popular choice, although it is slow, often unreliable when using variational penalties, and has a tendency to yield overregularized results.
METHODS: We propose 2 alternative approaches to control the balance between the data fidelity and regularization terms: 1) searching for an inflection point in the log-log domain of the L-curve, and 2) comparing frequency components of QSM reconstructions. We compare these methods against the conventional L-curve and U-curve approaches.
RESULTS: Our methods achieve predicted parameters that are better correlated with RMS error, high-frequency error norm, and structural similarity metric-based parameter optimizations than those obtained with traditional methods. The inflection point yields less overregularization and lower errors than traditional alternatives. The frequency analysis yields more visually appealing results, although with larger RMS error.
CONCLUSION: Our methods provide a robust parameter optimization framework for variational penalties in QSM reconstruction. The L-curve-based zero-curvature search produced almost optimal results for typical QSM acquisition settings. The frequency analysis method may use a 1.5 to 2.0 correction factor to apply it as a stand-alone method for a wider range of signal-to-noise-ratio settings. This approach may also benefit from fast search algorithms such as the binary search to speed up the process.
© 2020 International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine.

Entities:  

Keywords:  QSM; alternating direction method of multipliers (ADMM); augmented Lagrangian; total variation

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32738103      PMCID: PMC7722179          DOI: 10.1002/mrm.28435

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Magn Reson Med        ISSN: 0740-3194            Impact factor:   4.668


  25 in total

1.  Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity.

Authors:  Zhou Wang; Alan Conrad Bovik; Hamid Rahim Sheikh; Eero P Simoncelli
Journal:  IEEE Trans Image Process       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 10.856

2.  Nonlinear formulation of the magnetic field to source relationship for robust quantitative susceptibility mapping.

Authors:  Tian Liu; Cynthia Wisnieff; Min Lou; Weiwei Chen; Pascal Spincemaille; Yi Wang
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2012-04-09       Impact factor: 4.668

3.  Streaking artifact reduction for quantitative susceptibility mapping of sources with large dynamic range.

Authors:  Hongjiang Wei; Russell Dibb; Yan Zhou; Yawen Sun; Jianrong Xu; Nian Wang; Chunlei Liu
Journal:  NMR Biomed       Date:  2015-08-27       Impact factor: 4.044

4.  Calculation of susceptibility through multiple orientation sampling (COSMOS): a method for conditioning the inverse problem from measured magnetic field map to susceptibility source image in MRI.

Authors:  Tian Liu; Pascal Spincemaille; Ludovic de Rochefort; Bryan Kressler; Yi Wang
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 4.668

5.  Integrated Laplacian-based phase unwrapping and background phase removal for quantitative susceptibility mapping.

Authors:  Wei Li; Alexandru V Avram; Bing Wu; Xue Xiao; Chunlei Liu
Journal:  NMR Biomed       Date:  2013-12-11       Impact factor: 4.044

6.  Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping (QSM) Algorithms: Mathematical Rationale and Computational Implementations.

Authors:  Youngwook Kee; Zhe Liu; Liangdong Zhou; Alexey Dimov; Junghun Cho; Ludovic de Rochefort; Jin Keun Seo; Yi Wang
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 4.538

7.  Fast nonlinear susceptibility inversion with variational regularization.

Authors:  Carlos Milovic; Berkin Bilgic; Bo Zhao; Julio Acosta-Cabronero; Cristian Tejos
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2018-01-10       Impact factor: 4.668

8.  Fast quantitative susceptibility mapping with L1-regularization and automatic parameter selection.

Authors:  Berkin Bilgic; Audrey P Fan; Jonathan R Polimeni; Stephen F Cauley; Marta Bianciardi; Elfar Adalsteinsson; Lawrence L Wald; Kawin Setsompop
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2013-11-20       Impact factor: 4.668

9.  Magnetic susceptibility mapping of brain tissue in vivo using MRI phase data.

Authors:  Karin Shmueli; Jacco A de Zwart; Peter van Gelderen; Tie-Qiang Li; Stephen J Dodd; Jeff H Duyn
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 4.668

10.  The 2016 QSM Challenge: Lessons learned and considerations for a future challenge design.

Authors:  Carlos Milovic; Cristian Tejos; Julio Acosta-Cabronero; Pinar Senay Özbay; Ferdinand Schwesser; Jose Pedro Marques; Pablo Irarrazaval; Berkin Bilgic; Christian Langkammer
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2020-02-21       Impact factor: 4.668

View more
  2 in total

1.  Age-related magnetic susceptibility changes in deep grey matter and cerebral cortex of normal young and middle-aged adults depicted by whole brain analysis.

Authors:  Romana Burgetova; Petr Dusek; Andrea Burgetova; Adam Pudlac; Manuela Vaneckova; Dana Horakova; Jan Krasensky; Zsoka Varga; Lukas Lambert
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2021-09

2.  Hybrid data fidelity term approach for quantitative susceptibility mapping.

Authors:  Mathias Lambert; Cristian Tejos; Christian Langkammer; Carlos Milovic
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2022-04-18       Impact factor: 3.737

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.