Daniel Polak1,2, Daniel Nicolas Splitthoff2, Bryan Clifford3, Wei-Ching Lo3, Susie Y Huang1,4,5, John Conklin1,4, Lawrence L Wald1,4,5, Kawin Setsompop6, Stephen Cauley1,4. 1. Department of Radiology, A. A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital, Charlestown, Massachusetts, USA. 2. Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Erlangen, Germany. 3. Siemens Medical Solutions, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 4. Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 5. Harvard-MIT Health Sciences and Technology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA. 6. Department of Radiology, Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To demonstrate a navigator/tracking-free retrospective motion estimation technique that facilitates clinically acceptable reconstruction time. METHODS: Scout accelerated motion estimation and reduction (SAMER) uses a single 3-5 s, low-resolution scout scan and a novel sequence reordering to independently determine motion states by minimizing the data-consistency error in a SENSE plus motion forward model. This eliminates time-consuming alternating optimization as no updates to the imaging volume are required during the motion estimation. The SAMER approach was assessed quantitatively through extensive simulation and was evaluated in vivo across multiple motion scenarios and clinical imaging contrasts. Finally, SAMER was synergistically combined with advanced encoding (Wave-CAIPI) to facilitate rapid motion-free imaging. RESULTS: The highly accelerated scout provided sufficient information to achieve accurate motion trajectory estimation (accuracy ~0.2 mm or degrees). The novel sequence reordering improved the stability of the motion parameter estimation and image reconstruction while preserving the clinical imaging contrast. Clinically acceptable computation times for the motion estimation (~4 s/shot) are demonstrated through a fully separable (non-alternating) motion search across the shots. Substantial artifact reduction was demonstrated in vivo as well as corresponding improvement in the quantitative error metric. Finally, the extension of SAMER to Wave-encoding enabled rapid high-quality imaging at up to R = 9-fold acceleration. CONCLUSION: SAMER significantly improved the computational scalability for retrospective motion estimation and correction.
PURPOSE: To demonstrate a navigator/tracking-free retrospective motion estimation technique that facilitates clinically acceptable reconstruction time. METHODS: Scout accelerated motion estimation and reduction (SAMER) uses a single 3-5 s, low-resolution scout scan and a novel sequence reordering to independently determine motion states by minimizing the data-consistency error in a SENSE plus motion forward model. This eliminates time-consuming alternating optimization as no updates to the imaging volume are required during the motion estimation. The SAMER approach was assessed quantitatively through extensive simulation and was evaluated in vivo across multiple motion scenarios and clinical imaging contrasts. Finally, SAMER was synergistically combined with advanced encoding (Wave-CAIPI) to facilitate rapid motion-free imaging. RESULTS: The highly accelerated scout provided sufficient information to achieve accurate motion trajectory estimation (accuracy ~0.2 mm or degrees). The novel sequence reordering improved the stability of the motion parameter estimation and image reconstruction while preserving the clinical imaging contrast. Clinically acceptable computation times for the motion estimation (~4 s/shot) are demonstrated through a fully separable (non-alternating) motion search across the shots. Substantial artifact reduction was demonstrated in vivo as well as corresponding improvement in the quantitative error metric. Finally, the extension of SAMER to Wave-encoding enabled rapid high-quality imaging at up to R = 9-fold acceleration. CONCLUSION: SAMER significantly improved the computational scalability for retrospective motion estimation and correction.
Authors: Berkin Bilgic; Borjan A Gagoski; Stephen F Cauley; Audrey P Fan; Jonathan R Polimeni; P Ellen Grant; Lawrence L Wald; Kawin Setsompop Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2014-07-01 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Jalal B Andre; Brian W Bresnahan; Mahmud Mossa-Basha; Michael N Hoff; C Patrick Smith; Yoshimi Anzai; Wendy A Cohen Journal: J Am Coll Radiol Date: 2015-05-09 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: Stefan Skare; Tim Sprenger; Ola Norbeck; Henric Rydén; Lars Blomberg; Enrico Avventi; Mathias Engström Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2017-10-31 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Joseph Y Cheng; Tao Zhang; Nichanan Ruangwattanapaisarn; Marcus T Alley; Martin Uecker; John M Pauly; Michael Lustig; Shreyas S Vasanawala Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2014-10-20 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Lucilio Cordero-Grande; Giulio Ferrazzi; Rui Pedro A G Teixeira; Jonathan O'Muircheartaigh; Anthony N Price; Joseph V Hajnal Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2020-01-03 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Augusto Lio M Goncalves Filho; John Conklin; Maria Gabriela F Longo; Stephen F Cauley; Daniel Polak; Wei Liu; Daniel N Splitthoff; Wei-Ching Lo; John E Kirsch; Kawin Setsompop; Pamela W Schaefer; Susie Y Huang; Otto Rapalino Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2020-10-27 Impact factor: 4.003
Authors: Anouk S Verschuur; Vivian Boswinkel; Chantal M W Tax; Jochen A C van Osch; Ingrid M Nijholt; Cornelis H Slump; Linda S de Vries; Gerda van Wezel-Meijler; Alexander Leemans; Martijn F Boomsma Journal: J Neuroimaging Date: 2022-03-07 Impact factor: 2.324