Doppler Ultrasound Triggering for Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging at 7 Tesla
Fabian Kording1, Christian Ruprecht1, Bjoern Schoennagel1, Mathias Kladeck Kladeck1, Jin Yamamura1, Gerhard Adam1, Juliane Goebel2,3, Kai Nassenstein2, Stefan Maderwald3, Harald Quick3,4, and Oliver Kraff3

1Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany, 2Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Hospital, University Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany, 3Erwin L. Hahn Institute for Magnetic Resonance Imaging, University Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany, 4High Field and Hybrid MR Imaging, University Hospital, University Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany, Essen, Germany

Synopsis

Cardiac synchronization for magnetic resonance imaging at ultra-high-field MRI remains a challenge as disturbances in the inherent electrical measurement of the ECG increase with field strength. An ultrasound transducer and transmission line was developed and the feasibility of Doppler Ultrasound as an alternative method for cardiac synchronization was evaluated in terms of safety concerns, signal and image quality. The transmission line and transducer did not disturb the transmit RF field or image homogeneity and were approved for RF safety. Doppler Ultrasound was successfully applied for cardiac synchronization without signal disturbances and represents a promising alternative for ultra-high field CMR.

Introduction

A prerequisite for cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) is adequate synchronization of image acquisition with the cardiac cycle, usually achieved using the spatio-temporal information of an electrocardiogram (ECG). However, ECG is an inherently electrical measurement and distortions increase with higher magnetic field strengths, mainly caused by the magneto-hydro-dynamic (MHD) effect that occurs when a conductive fluid such as blood travels through a magnetic field1. Hence, ECG triggered CMR is limited by R-wave misregistration. Doppler ultrasound (DUS), on the other hand, is a promising alternative as it measures the physiological motion of the heart rather than electrical activation2. Therefore, it is not objected to MHD effects and does not interact with the image acquisition. However, the aluminum coating of the transducer and connecting cable, placed directly underneath a transmit/receive (Tx/Rx) RF coil, may introduce safety concerns at 7T. The purpose of this work was to evaluate the feasibility of DUS for CMR image synchronization at 7T.

Materials and Methods

A custom build cardiotocograph was used to derive DUS signals (Fig. 1). Since common-mode currents affect image homogeneity and may cause serious patient burns3, six cable traps tuned to 297 MHz were placed within the first 60 cm (each cable trap placed every 10 cm) of the transmission line connecting the ultrasound transducer. To evaluate potential distortions of the transmit RF field, large field-of-view coronal gradient echo images4 and DREAM flip angle (FA) maps5 were acquired in a large elliptic body phantom containing tissue-simulating liquid. In addition, potential effects on the H- and especially SAR-relevant E-field distribution by the transducer or transmission line were measured with field probes (H3DV7 and ES3DV2, SPEAG, Zurich, Switzerland) outside the MR system using a computer-controlled positioning device and the same 8-channel RF Tx/Rx body coil as used for MR imaging (Fig. 2). Line plots (3 mm step size, 71 data points) were acquired close to the phantom surface (1 cm distance), with and without transducer and transmission line present. Cardiac MRI was performed at a 7T whole-body research system (Magnetom 7T, Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Germany) in 3 healthy subjects after signing informed consent. The ultrasound transducer made out of one single ceramic (radius = 5 mm) was placed in an apical location under the RF coil to record transmitral flow. The E-wave in early diastole was selected as a trigger time point. For validation of the trigger signal, ECG, pulse, and DUS signals were recorded simultaneously outside of the MR room and compared in terms of RR interval length and time delay. Breath hold 2D cine FLASH sequences (matrix: 240x240, voxel size: 1.5×1.5×3.0 mm3, single slice, 25 phases, TR/TE 40.9/4.76 ms) were acquired in short axis and four chamber view. To assess the image quality, endocardial blurring (EB) was measured in the left ventricle as a mean over all cardiac phases.

Results

No signs of common-mode currents were visible along the transducer and transmission line in the gradient echo images (Fig. 2 A,B). Moreover, the B1 maps remained unaffected by the transducer and transmission line (Fig. 2 C, D). The measured E-and H-field distribution at the test bench yielded high agreement with maximal differences in the E-field of 0.75 V/m and 6 mA/m for the H-field, corresponding to a maximal change of 5 % with and without transducer and transmission line (Fig.2 F). As a consequence, no interferences were observed between DUS and MRI during CMR imaging. The validation of the DUS trigger signal resulted in a high correlation to the ECG signal of r = 0.99 with a p-value of 0.9 and a mean difference in RR-interval length between ECG and DUS of 0.1±1 ms (Fig.3). The DUS signal showed a mean time delay compared to the R-wave of 516±20 ms and a similar variation of 51 ms. The DUS signal was not disturbed by RF pulses or gradients during image acquisition. Exemplary in vivo images are shown in Fig. 4 with a corresponding plot over all cardiac phases with marked EB (yellow). Analysis of endocardial blurring between ventricular blood and myocardium resulted in 3.4±0.8 pixel.

Discussion and Conclusion

Doppler Ultrasound was applied as a new trigger method in cardiac MRI at 7T. The DUS transmission line and transducer were approved for RF safety and successfully tested for CMR image synchronization at 7T. As the DUS signal remained unaffected by the MHD effect and electromagnetic interferences, it represents a promising alternative for ultra-high field CMR. In future, this method needs to be evaluated in more detail in a larger patient population.

Acknowledgements

No acknowledgement found.

References

(1) Nijm GM, Swiryn S, Larson AC, et al. Extraction of the magnetohydrodynamic blood flow potential from the surface electrocardiogram in magnetic resonance imaging. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2008;46:729 –733. (2) Rubin JM, Fowlkes JB, Prince MR et al. Doppler US gating of cardiac MR imaging. Academic radiology 2000;7(12):1116-1122. (3) Hardy PT, Weil KM. A review of thermal MR injuries. Radiologic technology 2010;81(6):606-609. (4) Seeber D, Jevtic J, Menon A. Floating shield current suppression trap. Concepts in Magnetic Resonance Part B: Magnetic Resonance Engineering 2004;21(1):26-31. (5) Nehrke K, Börnert P. DREAM—a novel approach for robust, ultrafast, multislice B1 mapping. Magn Reson Med. 2012;68:1517–26

Figures

Fig.1.: A: Transducer with plastic casing and cable trap. B: Ceramic transducer without casing. C: Schematic of the transdurcer with aluminum coated ceramic (1), cable trap (2,4) and coaxial transmission line.

Fig.2: Gradient-echo images and FA maps with (A, C) and without (B, D) transducer and transmission line. E): Computer-controlled positioning device with field probe (1), coil (2), phantom (3) and transducer/transmission line (4). F): Resulting E- (solid lines) and H-field (dashed lines); with (red) and without (blue) transmission line and transducer.

Fig.3: A: ECG signal and corresponding DUS trigger signal. B: Correlation between DUS and ECG RR Interval (r = 0.9). C: Bland Altman plot of DUS vs. ECG RR Interval (mean difference = 0.1±1 ms)

Fig.4: Doppler Ultrasound-triggered 7T CMR: 4-chamber view (A), short axis (B), plot over all cardiac phases with marked endocardial blurring (yellow) (C).



Proc. Intl. Soc. Mag. Reson. Med. 24 (2016)
0494