Ziyue Wu1,2, Weiyi Chen1, Michael C.K. Khoo1, Sally L. Davidson Ward3, and Krishna S. Nayak1
1University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States, 2Alltech Medical Systems, Solon, OH, United States, 3Children's Hospital Los Angeles, Los Angels, CA, United States
Synopsis
We present a method
for simultaneous multi-slice airway collapsibility measurement based on sparse
golden-angle radial CAIPIRINHA, with acceleration factor up to 33.3. We present
data from patients with obstructive sleep apnea and normal controls. One
interesting finding is that a narrower airway site does not always correspond
to higher collapsibility. This finding may be of interest to sleep surgeons.
Our results also suggest that both compliance and Pclose were significantly
different between healthy controls and OSA patients (P<0.001), and both
measures can potentially serve as biomarkers.Purpose
To develop and demonstrate a real-time imaging method with adequate spatiotemporal resolution and coverage for assessing upper airway collapsibility in sleep apnea.
Introduction
Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is characterized by repetitive upper airway
(UA) collapse during sleep. UA compliance, defined as the ratio of UA
cross-sectional area and pressure, has been used to measure airway
collapsibility
1. Single-slice compliance measurement has been
performed using real-time imaging
2, however extended spatial
coverage is essential in order to characterize collapse pattern. Here we
present a method for simultaneous multi-slice compliance measurement based on
sparse golden-angle radial CAIPIRINHA
3.
Methods
Experiment Setup: experiments were performed on a clinical 3T scanner (EXCITE
HDxt, GE) using a 6-channel carotid receive coil. Physiological signals
including facemask pressure, abdomen bellow displacement, oxygen saturation and
heart rate were simultaneously recorded to determine wakefulness/sleep. The mask was
occasionally occluded to generate enough negative pressure for measuring
compliance. Five adolescent OSA patients were studied and three of them fell asleep. Three adult OSA and four adult healthy volunteers were also studied during wakefulness.
Data acquisition: to image N slices, a
total of N unique multi-band RF pulses
were applied alternatively. The nth
pulses was designed such that the phase difference between adjacent slices was $$$2\pi n/N, n\in [0,N-1]$$$. Continuous radial acquisition
with 1/N golden-angle increment was
used. Imaging parameters were: radial FLASH, 5˚ flip angle, 7mm/3mm slice thickness/spacing, 200 samples per readout, FOV 200x200mm2,
TR 4ms.
Reconstruction: 24-32 spokes were used to
reconstruct each temporal frame without view-sharing, which led to 96-128ms temporal
resolution. Each slice was reconstructed separately by iteratively minimizing the
cost function $$f_i=\sum_j ||ES_{ij}m_i-P_ik_j||_2^2+\lambda_i||\phi m_i||_1, i\in[1,N], j\in[1,N_c] $$ where i,j are the slice and coil index, Pi is the conjugate of RF phase cycling pattern, E is the inverse gridding operator, Sij is the coil sensitivity map, kj is the acquired
k-space data, $$$\phi$$$ is the finite temporal difference, and mi is the image to be solved.
Postprocessing: the airway was
segmented in each frame using a semi-automated region-growing algorithm2.
The airway area was normalized by the maximum cross-sectional area among all
slices during tidal breathing, in order to enable inter-subject comparison. For
each slice, all data from one occluded breath were used to perform a linear
regression (airway area vs pressure), from which the compliance (line slope)
and projected closing pressure Pclose (horizontal zero-crossing) were calculated.
Data Analysis: All slices were grouped into the retropalatal and retroglossal regions. For the adolescent OSA patients, compliance and Pclose of the inhale and exhale portion of the first two breaths within one occlusion were calculated and compared during sleep and wakefulness respectively. Airway collapsibility was also compared across different subject categories.
Results & Discussion
Figs. 1 & 2 contain some representative results from one OSA patient during sleep. Fig.1
shows two frames, one with the airway open (top row) and the other with it partially collapsed
(bottom row). The
proposed reconstruction was able to recover all of the relevant UA boundary
information. Minor residual streaking artifacts persisted but did not affect
airway segmentation in our experience. This could be mitigated by sacrificing
temporal resolution but a ~100ms resolution was purposely chosen to
fully resolve the airway dynamics. Fig. 2a
shows the cross-sectional area of each slice together with the mask pressure. Fig. 2b shows the linear
regression lines for all four slices.
One important finding is that a narrower airway
site during tidal breathing does not necessarily have higher compliance or
Pclose,
and therefore is not always the most collapsible. Table 1 & 2 show that compliance and
Pclose during sleep had smaller variance among the inhale/exhale portions of different breaths when compared to wakefulness. This is likely due to the involuntary muscle tone change, which suggests only the inhale portion of the first occluded breath should be used if only a wakefulness scan is performed. Table 3 shows the difference of compliance and
Pclose values between OSA and healthy subjects was significant and both measures could potentially serve as biomarkers for diagnosing OSA.
Conclusion
we have demonstrated a novel imaging method for
airway collapsibility measurement that combines acceleration techniques including SMS, parallel imaging,
modified GA radial trajectory, and compressed sensing, to achieve 33.3x acceleration
compared to fully sampled Cartesian scanning. To our best knowledge, we have experimentally discovered for the first time that a narrower airway site does not always correspond to higher
collapsibility. This finding may be of interest to sleep surgeons. Our
preliminary results suggest that both compliance and
Pclose may
serve as biomarkers to diagnose OSA, and can be calculated with a 20-second awake
scan.
Acknowledgements
NIH R01-HL105210References
[1] Kim et al., ISMRM 2012, p3688
[2] Wu et al., ISMRM 2014, p4323
[3] Yutzy et al., MRM 2011, 65(6):1630-37