Literature DB >> 33252752

Image-quality optimization and artifact reduction in fetal magnetic resonance imaging.

Fedel Machado-Rivas1,2, Camilo Jaimes2,3, John E Kirsch1,2, Michael S Gee4,5.   

Abstract

Fetal MRI allows for earlier and better detection of complex congenital anomalies. However, its diagnostic utility is often limited by technical barriers that introduce artifacts and reduce image quality. The main determinants of fetal MR image quality are speed of acquisition, spatial resolution and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). Imaging optimization is a challenge because a change to improve one scan parameter often leads to worsening of another. Moreover, the recent introduction of fetal MRI on 3-tesla (T) scanners to achieve better SNR can amplify some technical issues. Motion, banding artifacts and aliasing artifacts impact the quality of fetal acquisitions at any field strength. High specific absorption rate (SAR) and artifacts from inhomogeneities in the radiofrequency field are important limitations of high-field-strength imaging. We discuss technical barriers that impact image quality and are important limitations to prenatal MRI diagnosis, and propose solutions to improve image quality and reduce artifacts.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Congenital; Fetus; Image optimization; Magnetic resonance imaging; Prenatal

Year:  2020        PMID: 33252752     DOI: 10.1007/s00247-020-04672-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pediatr Radiol        ISSN: 0301-0449


  41 in total

1.  Comparison Between 1.5-T and 3-T MRI for Fetal Imaging: Is There an Advantage to Imaging With a Higher Field Strength?

Authors:  Teresa Victoria; Ann M Johnson; J Christopher Edgar; Deborah M Zarnow; Arastoo Vossough; Diego Jaramillo
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 3.959

Review 2.  3.0-T MR imaging of the abdomen: comparison with 1.5 T.

Authors:  Kevin J Chang; Ihab R Kamel; Katarzyna J Macura; David A Bluemke
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2008 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 5.333

Review 3.  Motion-compensation techniques in neonatal and fetal MR imaging.

Authors:  C Malamateniou; S J Malik; S J Counsell; J M Allsop; A K McGuinness; T Hayat; K Broadhouse; R G Nunes; A M Ederies; J V Hajnal; M A Rutherford
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2012-05-10       Impact factor: 3.825

Review 4.  Body MR imaging at 3.0 T: understanding the opportunities and challenges.

Authors:  Mara M Barth; Martin P Smith; Ivan Pedrosa; Robert E Lenkinski; Neil M Rofsky
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2007 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 5.333

Review 5.  Body MR Imaging: Artifacts, k-Space, and Solutions.

Authors:  Susie Y Huang; Ravi T Seethamraju; Pritesh Patel; Peter F Hahn; John E Kirsch; Alexander R Guimaraes
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2015-07-24       Impact factor: 5.333

6.  ISUOG Practice Guidelines: performance of fetal magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  D Prayer; G Malinger; P C Brugger; C Cassady; L De Catte; B De Keersmaecker; G L Fernandes; P Glanc; L F Gonçalves; G M Gruber; S Laifer-Narin; W Lee; A-E Millischer; M Molho; J Neelavalli; L Platt; D Pugash; P Ramaekers; L J Salomon; M Sanz; I E Timor-Tritsch; B Tutschek; D Twickler; M Weber; R Ximenes; N Raine-Fenning
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2017-04-06       Impact factor: 7.299

Review 7.  Fetal MRI at 3T-ready for routine use?

Authors:  Christian Weisstanner; Gerlinde M Gruber; Peter C Brugger; Christan Mitter; Mariana C Diogo; Gregor Kasprian; Daniela Prayer
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2016-10-21       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 8.  Fetal magnetic resonance imaging: jumping from 1.5 to 3 tesla (preliminary experience).

Authors:  Teresa Victoria; Diego Jaramillo; Timothy Paul Leslie Roberts; Deborah Zarnow; Ann Michelle Johnson; Jorge Delgado; Erika Rubesova; Arastoo Vossough
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2014-03-27

9.  Current controversies in prenatal diagnosis 3: Fetal MRI should be performed in all prenatally detected fetuses with a major structural abnormality.

Authors:  Lawrence D Platt; Richard A Barth; Denise Pugash
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 3.050

Review 10.  Abdominal MRI at 3.0 T: the basics revisited.

Authors:  Elmar M Merkle; Brian M Dale
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 3.959

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Fetal Neuroimaging Updates.

Authors:  Jeffrey N Stout; M Alejandra Bedoya; P Ellen Grant; Judy A Estroff
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am       Date:  2021-11       Impact factor: 2.266

2.  Attention-guided deep learning for gestational age prediction using fetal brain MRI.

Authors:  Liyue Shen; Jimmy Zheng; Edward H Lee; Katie Shpanskaya; Emily S McKenna; Mahesh G Atluri; Dinko Plasto; Courtney Mitchell; Lillian M Lai; Carolina V Guimaraes; Hisham Dahmoush; Jane Chueh; Safwan S Halabi; John M Pauly; Lei Xing; Quin Lu; Ozgur Oztekin; Beth M Kline-Fath; Kristen W Yeom
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-01-26       Impact factor: 4.379

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.