1191

Increasing the Value of Legacy MRI Scanners with Magnetic Resonance Fingerprinting
Brendan Lee Eck1, Wei-ching Lo1, Yun Jiang1, Kecheng Liu2, Vikas Gulani3, and Nicole Seiberlich1

1Biomedical Engineering, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, United States, 2Siemens Healthineers, Cleveland, OH, United States, 3Radiology, University Hospitals of Cleveland, Cleveland, OH, United States

Synopsis

Few of the 32,000 MRI scanners around the world are equipped with the latest hardware and software required for advanced imaging. Magnetic Resonance Fingerprinting (MRF) presents an opportunity to expand the value of the existing MRI install base as it is rapid, quantitative, and does not require the latest gradient systems or multi-channel receiver coils. In this work, we demonstrate repeatable and reproducible T1 and T2 MRF maps on a 16-year-old MRI scanner as a proof of principle towards implementing MRF on cheap, legacy MRI scanners.

Introduction

Of the more than 32,000 MRI scanners around the world1, very few are equipped with the latest hardware and software required for advanced imaging. Improving the speed and quality of images which can be collected on older scanners could help to provide state-of-the-art imaging to a larger fraction of the world’s population. The Magnetic Resonance Fingerprinting (MRF) framework presents an intriguing opportunity, as MRF is rapid and quantitative, and does not require the latest multi-channel receiver coils or rapid gradient systems. In this work, we explore the use of MRF to generate repeatable and reproducible T1 and T2 maps on older MRI scanners as a step towards replacing slow and qualitative imaging, and towards implementing MRF on low cost scanner platforms.

Methods

The ISMRM/NIST phantom2 was scanned on a 1.5T Magnetom Symphony (Siemens Healthcare AG, Erlangen, Germany), which was delivered in 2002, and underwent a TIM gradient system upgrade in 2015. This scanner is equipped with a 4-channel head receive coil and a gradient system with a maximum strength of 22 mT/m and maximum slew rate of 100 mT/m/s. Maps were obtained using a FISP-based MRF sequence3,4 with an in-plane spatial resolution of 1.6×1.6 mm2, 5 mm slice thickness, and scan time of 26s. The spiral trajectory was optimized for the older gradient system by lengthening the readout to reduce the slew rate, and measured in an axial orientation prior to the first scan. Scans were repeated five times on this 16-year old scanner, and a test-retest experiment was also performed on two different days. To test the ability to image at arbitrary orientations, scans were also acquired with the phantom at a double oblique orientation. T1 and T2 maps for all scans were generated by pattern matching to a dictionary with T1 ranging from 10 to 4500 ms and T2 ranging from 2 to 1000 ms, corrected for slice profile imperfections5. Average T1 and T2 values within circular ROIs were recorded (T2 up to 300ms2) for all five scans. Across the scans, average T1 and T2 values were compared to known reference values using linear correlation coefficients. Measurement variability was assessed by the coefficient of variation (CV). Reproducibility with the 16-year-old Symphony scanner was assessed by the correlation of measurements from the two different days and between the axial and double oblique orientations. Additionally, a proof-of-concept in vivo brain MRF scan was performed on the Symphony for a healthy volunteer.

Results

T1 and T2 maps from the NIST phantom in the axial and double oblique orientations are shown in Figure 1. Quantitatively, the average values measured in both orientations demonstrated a strong correlation with reference T1 and T2 values (R2≥0.99, Figure 2). Reproducibility of T1 and T2 measurements using the 16-year-old Symphony was good across the two different days and the two scan planes (R2≥0.99, Figure 3a-3b). The correlation of average T1 and T2 values measured on the Symphony to previously reported values measured on a modern 1.5T Aera scanner was also strong (R2≥0.99, Figure 3c). Average CV values for T1 and T2 were 2.0% and 3.1% (Figure 4). The proof-of-concept in vivo scan resulted in T1 and T2 maps where average white matter T1 and T2 values were 673 ms and 41.0 ms, respectively (Figure 5).

Discussion

This study demonstrates that T1 and T2 measurements with MRF are feasible on legacy MRI hardware. MRF maps were reproducible and comparable between the double oblique and axial geometries, suggesting that MRF can be performed across a range of orientations necessary for the clinical setting. The variability in T1 and T2 measurements was higher on the 16-year-old Symphony than expected on modern MRI scanners, but accurate parameter maps could be obtain in the NIST phantom with the rapid 26 second sequence. The proof-of-concept in vivo maps suggest that potential improvements exist: low-signal regions require compensation and the initially measured T1 and T2 values may need correction for possible T2* or diffusion effects due to the limited gradient strength and long spiral readout required. While preliminary, these findings suggest that accelerated quantitative imaging strategies such as MRF could be applied to a large fraction of the install base of MRI scanners, and not just those built to the most modern specifications, potentially expanding the availability of these technologies to patients in both the developed and the developing world.

Conclusion

MRF is feasible on older scanners with weaker gradient systems and a relatively small number of receiver coils. This work suggests that newer data collection and processing approaches like MRF may enable older scanners to be used for state-of-the-art imaging, providing access to the benefits of these technologies to a larger population.

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the assistance of Vladmir Nadtotchi, Ronald Collister, and Naren Nallapareddy in coordinating and performing the scans. This work was funded in part by the following sources: NIH R01HL094557, R01DK098503, R01EB016728, C06RR12463-01; NSF CBET 1553441, Siemens Healthineers (Erlangen, Germany). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH.

References

1. OECD Health Statistics 2018 - OECD. Available at: http://www.oecd.org/health/health-data.htm. (Accessed: 6th November 2018)

2. Keenan, K. E. et al. Comparison of T1 measurement using ISMRM/NIST system phantom | NIST. in (2016).

3. Jiang, Y., Ma, D., Seiberlich, N., Gulani, V. & Griswold, M. A. MR Fingerprinting Using Fast Imaging with Steady State Precession (FISP) with Spiral Readout. Magn Reson Med 74, 1621–1631 (2015).

4. Yu, A. C. et al. Development of a Combined MR Fingerprinting and Diffusion Examination for Prostate Cancer. Radiology 283, 729–738 (2017).

5. Ma, D. et al. Slice profile and B1 corrections in 2D magnetic resonance fingerprinting. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 78, 1781–1789 (2017).

Figures

Figure 1. MRF T1 and T2 maps obtained (from left-to-right) the Symphony scanner on day one, day two, and using a double oblique orientation. For the test-retest scans, the phantom was positioned using a similar axial orientation with the T2 array acquired with a 5 mm thick axial slice. For the double oblique test, the phantom was positioned in a double oblique orientation and a 5 mm thick slice of the T2 array was acquired. The map appearances are similar between the test-retest scans and double oblique scan.

Figure 2. Comparison of average T1 and T2 values to the known reference for the Symphony scanner. Average values were obtained from 5 repeated scans at the same axial orientation. Correlation was strong (R2≥0.99) with respect to the reference.

Figure 3. Reproducibility of Symphony T1 and T2 measurements and cross-scanner comparison. (a) Test-retest experiment on the Symphony on two different days to evaluate reproducibility. (b) Double oblique acquisition geometry compared to axial geometry. (c) Comparison between the Symphony and Aera scanners. Correlation of average T1 and T2 values for the Symphony across two different days and two different geometries was strong (R2≥0.99), suggesting good reproducibility of MRF parameter estimates. Correlation between the scanners was also strong (R2≥0.99) despite substantially different imaging hardware and differences in SNR from receive coils.

Figure 4. Analysis of MRF measurement variability for the Symphony scanner in both slice orientations with (left) CV values for T1 measurements and (right) CV values for T2 measurements expressed as percentages. T1 estimates were generally less variable than T2. For all evaluated T1 values, CV was <5%. For T2 values ranging from 16 to 267 ms, CV was <6%. Overall CV levels for the different scan geometries (axial vs double oblique) were comparable.

Figure 5. Proof-of-concept in vivo MRF maps for a healthy subject on the Symphony. (Left) T1 map, (Right) T2 map. An axial slice of the brain was acquired using the same sequence and same measured trajectory as in the Symphony phantom experiments. Average T1 and T2 within the region of interest (blue dashed region) were 673 ms and 41.0 ms, respectively.

Proc. Intl. Soc. Mag. Reson. Med. 27 (2019)
1191