Autofocusing-based correction of B0 fluctuation-induced ghosting
Alexander Loktyushin1,2, Philipp Ehses1, Bernhard Schölkopf2, and Klaus Scheffler1,3

1High-field Magnetic Resonance, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Tübingen, Germany, 2Empirical Inference, Max Planck Institute for Intelligent Systems, Tübingen, Germany, 3Biomedical Magnetic Resonance, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany

Synopsis

Long-TE gradient-echo images are prone to ghosting artifacts. Such degradation is primarily due to magnetic field variations caused by breathing or motion. The effect of these fluctuations amounts to different phase offsets in each acquired k-space line. A common remedy is to measure the problematic phase offsets using an extra non-phase-encoded scan before or after each imaging readout. In this work, we attempt to estimate the phase offsets directly from the raw image data by optimization-based search of phases that minimize an image distortion measure. This eliminates the need for any sequence modifications and additional scan time.

Purpose

To develop a purely data-driven postprocessing method capable of removing B0 fluctuation-induced ghosting artifacts in long-TE gradient-echo scans.

Methods

We formulate the navigator-less reconstruction as an optimization problem, which involves finding the minimum value of the objective function (Eq. 1). We seek the unknown phase values Φ that are associated with low values of the image quality measure φ, which we choose to be the entropy function. More precisely, we compute the entropy of the spatial intensity variations in the SOS-combined image. The matrices that are used to perform the finite difference operations in the x and y direction are denoted by Gx and Gy, respectively. The phase values Φ are applied to the acquired images uc (for each coil element c) using the diagonal matrix A, whose elements are the complex exponentials exp(iΦt), with t being the repetition index. Further, F denotes a discrete Fourier transform matrix.

$$\hat{\boldsymbol{\varPhi}}=\underset{\boldsymbol{\varPhi}}{\arg\min}\;\varphi((\mathbf{G_{\mathbf{x}}+G_{y}})SOS(\mathbf{\mathbf{F}^{\mathsf{H}}A}_{\boldsymbol{\varPhi}}\mathbf{u}_{c}))+\lambda\left\Vert \mathbf{G}\mathbf{\boldsymbol{\boldsymbol{\varPhi}}}\right\Vert ^{2} $$

In this formulation, the objective function is invariant to circular shifts of the image in the phase-encoding direction because such circular shifts amount to phase ramps (composed of recovered phases Φ) in the frequency domain. The problem of unnecessary circular shifts can be avoided by adding a regularization term which penalizes strong variations of the recovered phases. The parameter λ controls the strength of the regularization (we set it to 0.1). The resulting non-linear optimization problem is solved in 80 iterations of the LBFGS2 algorithm. We implemented the operations from Eq. 1 on the GPU in CUDA, bringing the computation time (for each slice) down to a few seconds.

To evaluate the performance of the proposed method we acquired long-TE GRE images of the brain of a healthy volunteer after obtaining informed consent and approval by the local ethics committee. Data was acquired at 9.4T using a custom-built head coil (16 transmit / 31 receive channels)4 . We acquired 9 slices of the ventral portions of the brain where field variations are relatively severe, mainly due to breathing-related motion. The GRE sequence included a non-phase-encoded navigator (or phase-stablization) scan after each imaging readout. Sequence parameters were as follows: TR=356 ms, TE = 30 ms, nominal flip angle = 45º, matrix = 512x512, resolution = 0.4x0.4 mm², slice thickness = 1 mm.

Results

Figure 1 shows a comparison between uncorrected images with images corrected for B0 fluctuations using a conventional navigator-based approach as well as the proposed autofocusing-based method. Ghosting artifacts in the uncorrected data are more severe in slice 6 (shown on the bottom), which is positioned lower than slice 3 (top). In both slices, autofocusing and navigator-based correction techniques are able to significantly improve image quality. Apart from some flow-related artifacts, ghosting is completely removed and the images resulting from both techniques are practically indistinguishable from one another. In fact, the differences between the autofocusing and navigator-based approaches amount to the minute high-frequency details as illustrated in Figure 2.

Figure 3 compares the phase offsets retrieved by our autofocusing algorithm with the navigator-based measurement. Since there is a sign as well as a global phase offset ambiguity, we adjusted the sign and subtracted the mean from both phase series before plotting them. Although, there are a few differences in the recovered phase values, the general pattern of oscillations (caused by breathing) is the same.

Discussion and Conclusion

The problem of finding the correct phase offsets is similar to the well-studied autofocusing-based motion correction1,3, and can be seen as its special case. We formulate and solve the optimization problem, where we seek the latent phase offsets in the Fourier domain that are associated with a minimal value of the image quality measure that is evaluated in the spatial domain. This way we avoid the need for extra non-phase-encoded navigator scans and related increase in sequence complexity, and, in some cases, scan time. The experimental results demonstrate our method is capable of removing the ghosting artifacts, and that the quality of the outcome images is similar to navigator-based reconstructions. To conclude, the proposed method is a valid alternative to using navigators with only a slight increase in postprocessing time.

Acknowledgements

No acknowledgement found.

References

1. Atkinson D, Hill D, Stoyle P, Summers P, Keevil S. Automatic correction of motion artifacts in magnetic resonance images using an entropy focus criterion. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 1997;16:903–910.

2. Byrd RH, Lu P, Nocedal J, Zhu C. A limited memory algorithm for bound constrained optimization. SIAM Journal on Scientific and Statistical Computing 1995;16:1190–1208.

3. Loktyushin A, Nickisch H, Pohmann R, Schölkopf B. Blind retrospective motion correction of MR images. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 2013;70:1608–1618.

4. Shajan G, Kozlov M , Hoffmann J, Turner R , Scheffler K und Pohmann R. A 16-channel dual-row transmit array in combination with a 31-element receive array for human brain imaging at 9.4 T. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 2014; 71(2):870–879.

Figures

Figure 1. Uncorrected images are compared with images corrected for B0 fluctuations using a conventional navigator-based approach as well as the proposed autofocusing-based method. Two slices out of the 9 acquired are shown. The ghosting artifacts are more severe in lower brain regions.

Figure 2. The difference images computed between the uncorrected, autofocusing-corrected and navigator-corrected slices. The colorbars indicate the intensity variations.

Figure 3. The comparison of the phase offsets retrieved by our autofocusing algorithm with the navigator-based measurement.



Proc. Intl. Soc. Mag. Reson. Med. 24 (2016)
1848