Improving EPI Phase Correction for Breast DWI
Jessica A McKay1, Steen Moeller2, Sudhir Ramanna2, Edward J Auerbach2, Michael T Nelson2, Kamil Ugurbil2, Essa Yacoub2, and Patrick J Bolan2

1Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States, 2Department of Radiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States

Synopsis

It is important to improve ghost correction in breast DWI using SE-EPI because residual ghosts bias ADC measurements, which reflect malignancy. The standard ghost correction method using a 3-line navigator frequently fails in breast DWI. In this work we implemented several alternative ghost correction strategies. The two best methods outperformed the standard 3-line navigator correction. These techniques applied 1D, linear corrections based on 1) phase maps from separate reference scans and 2) entropy minimization.

Background and Purpose

Diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) with spin-echo echo planar imaging (SE-EPI) is increasingly used for screening, diagnosis, and treatment monitoring in breast cancer because malignancies exhibit lower apparent diffusion coefficients (ADC) than benign lesions1. SE-EPI in breast imaging produces lower quality DWI than in the brain due to larger B0 inhomogeneity and abundant adipose tissue, which produce geometric distortion and chemical shift artifacts from imperfect fat suppression. Additionally, inconsistencies between k-space lines of opposite readout polarity (RO+/RO-) due to eddy currents and other factors cause Nyquist, or N/2, ghosts. Even small residual ghosts in source images can produce bias in the resulting ADC maps. These phase errors are commonly corrected by the three-line navigator method2, which acquires three readout lines without phase encoding with each scan to measure the phase difference between positive and negative RO lines. This method performs well in brain imaging but fails frequently in breast DWI. The purpose of this work is to compare the performance of this standard technique with alternative EPI phase correction methods to determine which method gives the best artifact suppression in breast DWI.

Methods

Six healthy female volunteers and one patient were recruited under IRB-approved protocols. The subjects were scanned prone on a 16-channel Sentinelle breast coil using a Siemens 3T PRISMA fit system. A standard 2D axial multislice SE-EPI bipolar diffusion sequence with four b-values (0, 100, 600, 800 s/mm2, 2 averages and 3 directions each) derived from ACRIN 66983 served as the base protocol (TR/TE=8000/74 ms, 32x32 cm FOV, nominal in-plane resolution 1.7 x 1.7 mm, 4 mm slices, 6/8 partial Fourier, ETL=52ms, right-left phase encoding, GRAPPA R=2, single shot SE-EPI ACS lines).

Five distinct phase correction strategies were used to correct this base DWI acquisition, summarized in Table 1. The 3-line navigator method2 (A) used the integrated navigator acquisition to calculate a linear phase correction independently for each b-value, average, coil, and slice. The phase mapping method (B) used additional reference scans with double FOV to produce separate, unaliased, coil-combined RO+ and RO- images. The phase difference between these RO+ and RO- images was fit with a 1D linear model as described by ref [4] for each slice and applied to all repetitions in the base scan. The entropy method (C) found the 1D linear phase correction for each coil and slice that minimized the b=0 s/mm2 image entropy using a multi-resolution discrete search5,6 and applied this correction to all repetitions. The RO reversal method (D) repeated the base scan with the readout polarity reversed and performed a complex addition of the two datasets to cancel phase ghosts, similar to PLACE7. Finally, the full phase navigator method (E) used a reference scan acquired without phase encoding to perform a linear 1D phase correction that varied over the RO train8.

The intensity of residual Nyquist ghosts was measured by manually masking out the object and measuring the SNR in the background region. This background-to-noise (BNR) was calculated separately for each slice and b-value.

Results

Figure 1 shows the BNR across methods for each subject, b-value, and slice. Residual ghosts were present in all cases at variable levels. Both the phase mapping (B) and entropy (C) methods gave lower average ghost levels and less variation in ghost signal than the standard 3-line navigator correction. Figure 2 shows an example comparing the ADC maps and residual ghost intensities between the standard (A) and best performing (B) methods.

Discussion

The standard 3-line navigator method, which corrects each b-value, average, and coil independently (A) fails frequently in breast DWI. Both phase mapping and entropy minimization performed significantly better even though a single correction from b=0 s/mm2 data was applied equally over all repetitions. This suggests that the diffusion weighting gradients and physiologic motion do not have a substantial impact on the correction needed. Monopolar diffusion gradients may have a more noticeable effect. Additionally, the highest performing method (B) was implemented on coil-combined data in order to have enough SNR and coverage to obtain a complete phase map, suggesting that a single correction over all coils may be sufficient. Both phase mapping and entropy minimization can be extended for higher order or 2D ghost corrections.

Conclusion

EPI phase correction using either an entropy minimization or a 1D phase mapping technique produces better Nyquist ghost suppression than the standard 3-line navigator in breast DWI. These methods may be applicable for DWI in other regions of the body and can be adapted for use with segmented or simultaneous multislice acquisitions.

Acknowledgements

NIH P41 EB015894

NIH R21 CA201834

References

1) Partridge SC, McDonald ES. Diffusion weighted MRI of the breast: Protocol optimization, guidelines for interpretation, and potential clinical applications. MRI Clin. 2013;21(3):601-624.

2) Heid O. Method for the phase correction of nuclear magnetic resonance signals. US 6043651 A. 2000.

3) Hylton N, Partridge SC, Rosen M, and Chenevert T. Diffusion Weighted MR Imaging Biomarkers for Assessment of Breast Cancer Response to Neoadjuvant Treatment: A sub-study of the I-SPY 2 TRIAL. ACRIN. https://www.acrin.org/6698_protocol.aspx

4) Chen N and Wyrwicz AM. Removal of EPI Nyquist ghost artifacts with two-dimensional phase correction. Magn Reson Med. 2004;51:1247-1253.

5) Clare S. Iterative Nyquist Ghost Correction for Single and Multi-shot EPI using an Entropy Measure. Proc ISMRM. 2003:1041.

6) Skare ST, Clayton DB, Newbould RD, Moseley ME, Bammer R. A fast and robust minimum entropy based non-interactive Nyquist ghost correction algorithm. Proc ISMRM. Seattle; 2006:2349.

7) Xiang QS and Ye FQ. Correction for geometric distortion and N/2 ghosting in EPI by phase labeling for additional coordinate encoding (PLACE). Magn Reson Med. 2007 Apr;57(4):731-41.

8) Maier JK, Vavrek RM, and Glover GH. Correction of nmr data acquired by an echo-planar technique. US 5151656 A. 1992.

Figures

Figure 1: The BNR for all slices, subjects, and b-values. Higher mean values (black lines) indicate larger ghost signals, and spread reflects variability in ghost suppression. Methods B-E are significantly different than the standard method A based on a paired t-test at the <0.01 level.

Figure 2: Phase mapping (right) corrects substantially more ghosts than the 3-line navigator (left). The ADC maps (top) and maximum intensity projections (MIP) through the background region of 12 center slices of b=0 s/mm2 (bottom) are shown. The noise region used for BNR calculations is shown in red.

Table 1: Summary of phase correction strategies.



Proc. Intl. Soc. Mag. Reson. Med. 24 (2016)
1796