Junlan Lu1, Ziyi Wang2, Elianna Bier2, Suphachart Leewiwatwong2, David Mummy3, Bastiaan Driehuys1,2,3. 1. Medical Physics Graduate Program, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA. 2. Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA. 3. Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To correct for RF inhomogeneity for in vivo 129 Xe ventilation MRI using flip-angle mapping enabled by randomized 3D radial acquisitions. To extend this RF-depolarization mapping approach to create a flip-angle map template applicable to arbitrary acquisition strategies, and to compare these approaches to conventional bias field correction. METHODS: RF-depolarization mapping was evaluated first in digital simulations and then in 51 subjects who had undergone radial 129 Xe ventilation MRI in the supine position at 3T (views = 3600; samples/view = 128; TR/TE = 4.5/0.45 ms; flip angle = 1.5; FOV = 40 cm). The images were corrected using newly developed RF-depolarization and templated-based methods and the resulting quantitative ventilation metrics (mean, coefficient of variation, and gradient) were compared to those resulting from N4ITK correction. RESULTS: RF-depolarization and template-based mapping methods yielded a pattern of RF-inhomogeneity consistent with the expected variation based on coil architecture. The resulting corrected images were visually similar, but meaningfully distinct from those generated using standard N4ITK correction. The N4ITK algorithm eliminated the physiologically expected anterior-posterior gradient (-0.04 ± 1.56%/cm, P < 0.001). These 2 newly introduced methods of RF-depolarization and template correction retained the physiologically expected anterior-posterior ventilation gradient in healthy subjects (2.77 ± 2.09%/cm and 2.01 ± 2.73%/cm, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Randomized 3D 129 Xe MRI ventilation acquisitions can inherently be corrected for bias field, and this technique can be extended to create flip angle templates capable of correcting images from a given coil regardless of acquisition strategy. These methods may be more favorable than the de facto standard N4ITK because they can remove undesirable heterogeneity caused by RF effects while retaining results from known physiology.
PURPOSE: To correct for RF inhomogeneity for in vivo 129 Xe ventilation MRI using flip-angle mapping enabled by randomized 3D radial acquisitions. To extend this RF-depolarization mapping approach to create a flip-angle map template applicable to arbitrary acquisition strategies, and to compare these approaches to conventional bias field correction. METHODS: RF-depolarization mapping was evaluated first in digital simulations and then in 51 subjects who had undergone radial 129 Xe ventilation MRI in the supine position at 3T (views = 3600; samples/view = 128; TR/TE = 4.5/0.45 ms; flip angle = 1.5; FOV = 40 cm). The images were corrected using newly developed RF-depolarization and templated-based methods and the resulting quantitative ventilation metrics (mean, coefficient of variation, and gradient) were compared to those resulting from N4ITK correction. RESULTS: RF-depolarization and template-based mapping methods yielded a pattern of RF-inhomogeneity consistent with the expected variation based on coil architecture. The resulting corrected images were visually similar, but meaningfully distinct from those generated using standard N4ITK correction. The N4ITK algorithm eliminated the physiologically expected anterior-posterior gradient (-0.04 ± 1.56%/cm, P < 0.001). These 2 newly introduced methods of RF-depolarization and template correction retained the physiologically expected anterior-posterior ventilation gradient in healthy subjects (2.77 ± 2.09%/cm and 2.01 ± 2.73%/cm, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Randomized 3D 129 Xe MRI ventilation acquisitions can inherently be corrected for bias field, and this technique can be extended to create flip angle templates capable of correcting images from a given coil regardless of acquisition strategy. These methods may be more favorable than the de facto standard N4ITK because they can remove undesirable heterogeneity caused by RF effects while retaining results from known physiology.
Authors: Susan R Hopkins; A Cortney Henderson; David L Levin; Kei Yamada; Tatsuya Arai; Richard B Buxton; G Kim Prisk Journal: J Appl Physiol (1985) Date: 2007-03-29
Authors: Fatima Neemuchwala; Maryam Ghadimi Mahani; Yuxi Pang; Eunjee Lee; Timothy D Johnson; Craig J Galbán; Aleksa B Fortuna; Ramon Sanchez-Jacob; Chris A Flask; Samya Z Nasr Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2020-03-11
Authors: Nicholas J Tustison; Talissa A Altes; Kun Qing; Mu He; G Wilson Miller; Brian B Avants; Yun M Shim; James C Gee; John P Mugler; Jaime F Mata Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2021-07-05 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: David J Roach; Matthew M Willmering; Joseph W Plummer; Laura L Walkup; Yin Zhang; Md Monir Hossain; Zackary I Cleveland; Jason C Woods Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2021-08-12 Impact factor: 3.173