3D Magnetic Resonance Fingerprinting for Quantitative Breast Imaging
Yong Chen1, Shivani Pahwa1, Jesse Hamilton2, Sara Dastmalchian1, Donna Plecha3, Nicole Seiberlich2, Mark Griswold1, and Vikas Gulani1

1Department of Radiology, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, United States, 2Department of Biomedical Engineering, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, United States, 3Department of Radiology, University Hospitals Case Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, United States

Synopsis

In this study, a rapid relaxometry method was developed for breast imaging using the MRF technique, which allows simultaneous and volumetric quantification of T1 and T2 relaxation times for breast tissues.

Target Audience

This work targets those interested in fast quantitative imaging and breast MRI.

Purpose

MRI is increasingly important in breast imaging for lesion detection and characterization. While it provides high sensitivity (approximately 90%), its specificity is relatively low (between 37% and 86%) because many benign lesions exhibit features similar to cancer1. Previous breast MRI has also demonstrated significant difference in both T1 and T2 relaxation times between malignant and benign lesions2. However, quantitative measurements of relaxation times are rarely performed in clinical settings because of the long scan time, especially for volumetric coverage. Recently, a new quantitative imaging framework, named MR Fingerprinting (MRF), has been introduced, which can provide rapid and simultaneous quantification of both T1 and T2 relaxation times3. The objective of this study is to adopt this MRF framework to develop a quantitative method for 3D relaxometry in breast imaging.

Methods

The MRI experiments were performed on a Siemens 3T Verio scanner using a breast coil with 12 receive elements. A FISP-based MRF method, which was originally developed for 2D cardiac imaging, was modified for 3D breast imaging4. The MRF data were acquired sequentially through partitions, as shown in Fig. 1. For each partition, the data acquisition was divided into 16 segments, each with a different combination of a fat-saturation module, a inversion-recovery module and T2-sensitivity module for effective T1 and T2 sensitivity. In the following data acquisition window, 48 uniform-density spiral arms were acquired in 48 TRs with variable flip angles ranging from 5° to 12°. A high in-plane reduction factor of 48 was used, so only one spiral arm was acquired for each partition within a 3D volume. The same combination of preparation modules and flip angle pattern was repeated for each partition and a constant time delay of 5sec was applied between partitions for the longitudinal recovery. Other imaging parameters included: FOV=40×40cm; matrix size 256×256; slice thickness 3mm; number of partitions, 16; partial Fourier in the partition direction, 6/8. The overall acquisition time for 16 partitions was about 3.5min.

To retrieve tissue properties (T1, T2 and proton density) from the MRF measurement, a dictionary including the signal evolutions from all possible combinations of parameters for a T1 range of 100 to 3000ms and T2 range of 10 to 500ms was calculated using Bloch simulations3. The acquired signal in each voxel of the highly undersampled volumes were then matched to an entry in the dictionary using pattern matching, which yielded all underlying tissue parameters used to generate this dictionary entry.

The accuracy of the proposed method was first validated using a phantom and the results were compared to those acquired from the standard method using the single-echo spin-echo sequences. The method was then applied to three normal volunteers (mean age, 21.3 years) and informed consent was obtained from all volunteers.

Results

Fig. 2 shows the results of T1 and T2 relaxation times acquired from the central partition in a phantom experiment. A close match to the results from the standard method was observed for a large range of T1 (200~1600 ms) and T2 (20~105ms) values. Fig. 3 shows the average T1 and T2 values measured from the 10 vials in all 16 partitions. Despite of a small variation in T1 (2.6%±2.1%) and T2 values (11.1%±14.1%) at the end partitions, a consistent measurement was observed with a T1 variation of 0.8%±0.3% and a T2 variation of 3.5%±2.7% across the central 14 partitions.

Fig. 4 shows representative T1, T2 and proton density maps acquired from a normal volunteer. The 8 odd numbered partitions out of a total of 16 partitions are presented and the rest are omitted here for ease of viewing. An average T1 of 1449±163ms and T2 of 50±7ms for fibroglandular tissues were obtained from the three normal subjects, which agrees well with the literature values acquired from 3T5.

Discussion and Conclusion

In the current study, a rapid and accurate volumetric relaxometry method was developed for breast imaging using the MRF technique and the method was tested in both phantom studies and normal subjects. A small variation mainly in T2 relaxation times was observed at the edge partitions, which likely relates to slice profile uniformity. This variation can be corrected in the future by including the slice profile in the Bloch simulation. In this proof-of-concept study, a limited number of partitions were acquired in 3.5min with no data acceleration or undersampling along the partition direction. Data undersampling in this direction will be explored in the future to achieve whole-breast coverage within a similar time window.

Acknowledgements

Siemens Healthcare and NIH grants 1R01DK098503, R00EB011527, 1R01HL094557, and 2KL2TR000440.

References

1. Jacob MA, et al. Radiol, 2003;229:225–232.

2. Merchant TE, et al. Acta Radiol, 1993;34:356-361.

3. Dan M, et al. Nature, 2013; 187–192.

4. Hamilton JI, et al. Int. Soc. Magn. Reson. Med. 2015;26.

5. Rakow-Penner R, et al. JMRI, 2006;23:87-91.

Figures

Figure 1. Sequence diagram for 3D breast MRF. FS, fat suppression module; INV, inversion recovery module; T2, T2 preparation module using the MLEV algorithm.

Figure 2. T1 (a) and T2 (b) maps acquired from the central partition in a phantom study. (c-d) Comparison of T1 and T2 values obtained from the proposed method and the standard methods.

Figure 3. Variation of phantom T1 (left) and T2 (right) values along the partition direction.

Figure 4. Simultaneously acquired T1 (a), T2 (b) and proton density (c) maps from a normal subject. 8 out of a total of 16 maps are presented for each tissue property. The total acquisition time for the entire volume was 3.5 minutes.



Proc. Intl. Soc. Mag. Reson. Med. 24 (2016)
0399