Alessandro Sciarra1,2,3, Hendrik Mattern2, Renat Yakupov4, Soumick Chatterjee2,5, Daniel Stucht2, Steffen Oeltze-Jafra1,4,6, Frank Godenschweger2, Oliver Speck2,3,4,6,7. 1. Medicine and Digitalization-MedDigit, Medical Faculty, University Department of Neurology, Otto von Guericke University, Magdeburg, Germany. 2. Department of Biomedical Magnetic Resonance, Otto von Guericke University, Magdeburg, Germany. 3. Institute for Physics, Otto von Guericke University, Magdeburg, Germany. 4. German Centre for Neurodegenerative Diseases, Magdeburg, Germany. 5. Data and Knowledge Engineering Group, Faculty of Computer Science, Otto von Guericke University, Magdeburg, Germany. 6. Center for Behavioral Brain Sciences, Magdeburg, Germany. 7. Leibniz Institute for Neurobiology, Magdeburg, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Quantitative assessment of prospective motion correction (PMC) capability at 7T MRI for compliant healthy subjects to improve high-resolution images in the absence of intentional motion. METHODS: Twenty-one healthy subjects were imaged at 7 T. They were asked not to move, to consider only unintentional motion. An in-bore optical tracking system was used to monitor head motion and consequently update the imaging volume. For all subjects, high-resolution T1 (3D-MPRAGE), T2 (2D turbo spin echo), proton density (2D turbo spin echo), and T 2 ∗ (2D gradient echo) weighted images were acquired with and without PMC. The images were evaluated through subjective and objective analysis. RESULTS: Subjective evaluation overall has shown a statistically significant improvement (5.5%) in terms of image quality with PMC ON. In a separate evaluation of every contrast, three of the four contrasts (T1 , T2 , and proton density) have shown a statistically significant improvement (9.62%, 9.85%, and 9.26%), whereas the fourth one ( T 2 ∗ ) has shown improvement, although not statistically significant. In the evaluation with objective metrics, average edge strength has shown an overall improvement of 6% with PMC ON, which was statistically significant; and gradient entropy has shown an overall improvement of 2%, which did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: Based on subjective assessment, PMC improved image quality in high-resolution images of healthy compliant subjects in the absence of intentional motion for all contrasts except T 2 ∗ , in which no significant differences were observed. Quantitative metrics showed an overall trend for an improvement with PMC, but not all differences were significant.
PURPOSE: Quantitative assessment of prospective motion correction (PMC) capability at 7T MRI for compliant healthy subjects to improve high-resolution images in the absence of intentional motion. METHODS: Twenty-one healthy subjects were imaged at 7 T. They were asked not to move, to consider only unintentional motion. An in-bore optical tracking system was used to monitor head motion and consequently update the imaging volume. For all subjects, high-resolution T1 (3D-MPRAGE), T2 (2D turbo spin echo), proton density (2D turbo spin echo), and T 2 ∗ (2D gradient echo) weighted images were acquired with and without PMC. The images were evaluated through subjective and objective analysis. RESULTS: Subjective evaluation overall has shown a statistically significant improvement (5.5%) in terms of image quality with PMC ON. In a separate evaluation of every contrast, three of the four contrasts (T1 , T2 , and proton density) have shown a statistically significant improvement (9.62%, 9.85%, and 9.26%), whereas the fourth one ( T 2 ∗ ) has shown improvement, although not statistically significant. In the evaluation with objective metrics, average edge strength has shown an overall improvement of 6% with PMC ON, which was statistically significant; and gradient entropy has shown an overall improvement of 2%, which did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: Based on subjective assessment, PMC improved image quality in high-resolution images of healthy compliant subjects in the absence of intentional motion for all contrasts except T 2 ∗ , in which no significant differences were observed. Quantitative metrics showed an overall trend for an improvement with PMC, but not all differences were significant.
Authors: Nicolas A Pannetier; Theano Stavrinos; Peter Ng; Michael Herbst; Maxim Zaitsev; Karl Young; Gerald Matson; Norbert Schuff Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2015-03-11 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Pierre-Louis Bazin; Hannah E Nijsse; Wietske van der Zwaag; Daniel Gallichan; Anneke Alkemade; Frans M Vos; Birte U Forstmann; Matthan W A Caan Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2020-08-08 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Hendrik Mattern; Alessandro Sciarra; Frank Godenschweger; Daniel Stucht; Falk Lüsebrink; Georg Rose; Oliver Speck Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2017-12-11 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Julian Maclaren; Oliver Speck; Daniel Stucht; Peter Schulze; Jürgen Hennig; Maxim Zaitsev Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 4.668