Zhehao Hu1,2, Andre van der Kouwe3,4, Fei Han5, Jiayu Xiao1, Junzhou Chen1,2, Hui Han1, Xiaoming Bi5, Debiao Li1,2, Zhaoyang Fan1,6. 1. Biomedical Imaging Research Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, USA. 2. Department of Bioengineering, University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA. 3. Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital, Charlestown, Massachusetts, USA. 4. Department of Radiology, Harvard Medical School, Brookline, Massachusetts, USA. 5. Siemens Medical Solutions USA, Inc., Los Angeles, California, USA. 6. Department of Radiology, University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: (1) To investigate the effect of internal localized movement on 3DMR intracranial vessel wall imaging and (2) to develop a novel motion-compensation approach combining volumetric navigator (vNav) and self-gating (SG) to simultaneously compensate for bulk and localized movements. METHODS: A 3D variable-flip-angle turbo spin-echo (ie, SPACE) sequence was modified to incorporate vNav and SG modules. The SG signals from the center k-space line are acquired at the beginning of each TR to detect localized motion-affected TRs. The vNavs from low-resolution 3D EPI are acquired to identify bulk head motion. Fifteen healthy subjects and 3 stroke patients were recruited in this study. Overall image quality (0-poor to 4-excellent) and vessel wall sharpness were compared among the scenarios with and without bulk and/or localized motion and/or the proposed compensation strategies. RESULTS: Localized motion reduced wall sharpness, which was significantly mitigated by SG (ie, outer boundary of basilar artery: 0.68 ± 0.27 vs 0.86 ± 0.17; P = .037). When motion occurred, the overall image quality and vessel wall sharpness obtained with vNav-SG SPACE were significantly higher than those obtained with conventional SPACE (ie, basilarartery outer boundary sharpness: 0.73 ± 0.24 vs 0.94 ± 0.24; P = .033), yet comparable to those obtained in motion-free scans (ie, basilarartery outer boundary sharpness: 0.94 ± 0.24 vs 0.96 ± 0.31; P = .815). CONCLUSION: Localized movements can induce considerable artifacts in intracranial vessel wall imaging. The vNav-SG approach is capable of compensating for both bulk and localized motions.
PURPOSE: (1) To investigate the effect of internal localized movement on 3DMR intracranial vessel wall imaging and (2) to develop a novel motion-compensation approach combining volumetric navigator (vNav) and self-gating (SG) to simultaneously compensate for bulk and localized movements. METHODS: A 3D variable-flip-angle turbo spin-echo (ie, SPACE) sequence was modified to incorporate vNav and SG modules. The SG signals from the center k-space line are acquired at the beginning of each TR to detect localized motion-affected TRs. The vNavs from low-resolution 3D EPI are acquired to identify bulk head motion. Fifteen healthy subjects and 3 stroke patients were recruited in this study. Overall image quality (0-poor to 4-excellent) and vessel wall sharpness were compared among the scenarios with and without bulk and/or localized motion and/or the proposed compensation strategies. RESULTS: Localized motion reduced wall sharpness, which was significantly mitigated by SG (ie, outer boundary of basilar artery: 0.68 ± 0.27 vs 0.86 ± 0.17; P = .037). When motion occurred, the overall image quality and vessel wall sharpness obtained with vNav-SG SPACE were significantly higher than those obtained with conventional SPACE (ie, basilarartery outer boundary sharpness: 0.73 ± 0.24 vs 0.94 ± 0.24; P = .033), yet comparable to those obtained in motion-free scans (ie, basilarartery outer boundary sharpness: 0.94 ± 0.24 vs 0.96 ± 0.31; P = .815). CONCLUSION: Localized movements can induce considerable artifacts in intracranial vessel wall imaging. The vNav-SG approach is capable of compensating for both bulk and localized motions.
Authors: Nathan White; Cooper Roddey; Ajit Shankaranarayanan; Eric Han; Dan Rettmann; Juan Santos; Josh Kuperman; Anders Dale Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Matthew D Alexander; Chun Yuan; Aaron Rutman; David L Tirschwell; Gerald Palagallo; Dheeraj Gandhi; Laligam N Sekhar; Mahmud Mossa-Basha Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 2016-01-08 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: Jeffrey D Bodle; Edward Feldmann; Richard H Swartz; Zoran Rumboldt; Truman Brown; Tanya N Turan Journal: Stroke Date: 2012-11-29 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Anita A Harteveld; Nerissa P Denswil; Wim Van Hecke; Hugo J Kuijf; Aryan Vink; Wim G M Spliet; Mat J Daemen; Peter R Luijten; Jaco J M Zwanenburg; Jeroen Hendrikse; Anja G van der Kolk Journal: Data Brief Date: 2018-05-02
Authors: Raghav R Mattay; Jose F Saucedo; Vance T Lehman; Jiayu Xiao; Emmanuel C Obusez; Scott B Raymond; Zhaoyang Fan; Jae W Song Journal: Semin Ultrasound CT MR Date: 2021-08-01 Impact factor: 1.641
Authors: B Sannananja; C Zhu; C G Colip; A Somasundaram; M Ibrahim; T Khrisat; M Mossa-Basha Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2022-05-26 Impact factor: 4.966