Synopsis
We propose a novel sequence
for magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) of the brain based on multiband
excitation and 3D encoding of the distributed slab with multishot spirals. This
sequence allows access to optimal SNR efficiency and reduced distortions from
field inhomogeneity, but also parallel imaging acceleration both in-plane and
thru-plane without onerous artifacts and g-factor
penalties. We also incorporate correction for nonlinear motion-induced phase
errors through a kz-blipped
spiral-in 3D navigator. In this abstract we demonstrate the performance of the
sequence and its ability to capture whole-brain MRE data at 2x2x2 mm3
resolution in 3 minutes.Introduction
Brain tissue viscoelasticity
measured with magnetic resonance elastography
1 (MRE) has continually
shown promise in assessing neurodegenerative conditions
2,3 and
intracranial tumors
4,5. To develop the ability of MRE methods to
capture local property measures, many recent methodological advancements have
focused on the pursuit of high-resolution viscoelastic maps through improved
imaging techniques
6-8. The challenge in acquiring high-resolution
MRE data rests in balancing total scan time, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and
distortions from field inhomogeneity. Our previous MRE efforts have introduced multishot
spiral readouts
6 to reduce distortion and 3D encoding to maximize
SNR efficiency
7. In this work we incorporate a multiband excitation
to enable parallel imaging acceleration in the slice direction using a 32-channel
head coil
9 and further reduce scan time. We also introduce a
nonlinear motion-induced phase error correction scheme
10 for phase
errors not handled by linear correction, such as from cardiac pulsation. The
result is a flexible sequence for fast, high-resolution, whole-brain MRE that
produces 2x2x2 mm
3 images in 3 minutes.
Sequence Design
Figure 1 presents the proposed
sequence, which includes standard MRE features such as flow-compensated motion
encoding gradients. Details of novel imaging features are:
(a) Multiband excitation: The multiband
pulses excite and refocus multiple slices at once, each separated in z and with different phase to reduce peak
RF power11. The resulting volumes are excited in an interleaved
fashion to cover the entire brain. This provides access to optimal SNR efficiency
due to its use of short TR7.
(b) 3D distributed slab encoding: The
resulting volume is encoded with a 3D stack-of-spirals that includes multishot constant
density spirals12 in-plane with kz-blips.
The total number of designed shots per volume is equal to the number of
in-plane interleaved spirals times the number of excited slices. Parallel
imaging acceleration with SENSE13 is accomplished by undersampling
both in-plane (kxy) and
thru-plane (kz).
(c) Nonlinear phase error correction: The low-resolution
3D navigator image of the distributed volume is acquired using a kz-blipped spiral-in
trajectory14. The use of a navigator before readout reduces
acquisition time and RF energy deposition by removing a second refocusing
pulse. Phase error maps for each shot are recovered by comparing with the mean
of all navigator images for a given volume7. Nonlinear correction is
performed by applying the negative of these phase errors during iterative image
reconstruction10.
Methods
We acquired MRE data with
2x2x2 mm
3 isotropic resolution using the proposed sequence with a
Siemens 3T Trio and32-channel head coil. The specific sequence parameters
included: 4 band excitation; 60 total slices (15 volumes); 4 in-plane k-space readouts; FOV = 240 mm; matrix =
120x120; TR/TE = 1800/75 ms. Vibrations were generated at 50 Hz using the
Resoundant pneumatic actuator system and 4 phase offsets were acquired.
Iterative image reconstruction included correction for field inhomogeneity
distortions
15. We reconstructed datasets with various undersampling
patterns and with/without motion correction, and compared resulting OSS-SNR
16
and shear stiffness maps from nonlinear inversion
17.
Results and Discussion
Figure 2 presents
reconstructed images from a single volume with different sampling patterns. From
magnitude difference maps, areas of large errors due to residual aliasing
and g-factor penalties are lowest in
the two-direction undersampled case (Rxy/Rz = 2/2) as compared to either
in-plane or thru-plane undersampling only. This is further evidenced by the 2/2 case having
the smallest NRMSE relative to fully-sampled. The ability to undersample in both directions allows for higher
acceleration factors without the associated artifacts that compromise MRE
results.
Figure 3 presents the MRE
results from the undersampled dataset compared with the fully-sampled case. This
dataset still maintains a high OSS-SNR16 for inversion stability
(7.6) due to the SNR efficiency of the sequence. The resulting shear stiffness
map is very similar to the fully-sampled case, with an NRMSE of only 5.0%. The majority of error is concentrated at ventricles, which are not valid regions
for MRE analysis given their model-data mismatch.
Figure 4 demonstrates the
performance of the nonlinear motion-induced phase error correction. Compared with magnitude images, complex displacement images, and shear stiffness maps
from the uncorrected dataset, the corrected results exhibit clear improvement.
This is especially evident through an SNR improvement of 18% (OSS-SNR: 7.6 vs.
6.4) and corrected phase inconsistencies in the slice direction.
Conclusions
We have demonstrated the
performance of the proposed multiband sequence in acquiring high-resolution,
high-SNR brain MRE displacement data quickly. By enabling parallel imaging
acceleration both in-plane and thru-plane, we created a flexible sequence that
can be used to improve the clinical adoption of high-resolution MRE methods or
further push the bounds of achievable resolution.
Acknowledgements
Partial support provided by the Biomedical
Imaging Center of the Beckman Institute at the University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign and NIH/NIBIB grants R01-EB018230
and R01-EB001981.References
[1] R Muthupillai, et al., Science, 1995; 269(5232):1854-1857.
[2] MC Murphy, et al., J Magn Reson Imaging, 2011; 34(3):494-498.
[3] J Wuerfel, et al., NeuroImage, 2010; 49(3):2520-2525.
[4] MC Murphy, et al., J Neurosurg, 2013; 118(3):643-648.
[5] K-J Streitberger, et al., PLoS ONE, 2014; 9(10):e110588.
[6] CL Johnson, et al., Magn Reson Med, 2013; 70(2):404-412.
[7] CL Johnson, et al., Magn Reson Med, 2014; 71(2):477-485.
[8] J Braun, et al., NeuroImage, 2014; 90C:308-314.
[9] JL Holtrop, et al., ISMRM, 2015; p. 2893.
[10] C Liu, et al., Magn Reson Med, 2004; 52(6):1388-1396.
[11] E Wong, ISMRM,
2012; p. 2209.
[12] GH Glover, Magn
Reson Med, 1999; 42(2):412-415.
[13] KP Pruessman, et al., Magn Reson Med, 2001; 46(4):638-651.
[14] B Zahneisen, et al., Magn Reson Med, 2014; 71(6):2071-2081.
[15] BP Sutton, et al., IEEE T Med Imaging, 2003; 22(2):178-188.
[16] MDJ McGarry, et al., Phys Med Biol, 2011; 56(13):N153-N164.
[17] MDJ McGarry, et al., Med Phys, 2012; 39(10):6388-6396.