Qiqi Tong1, Mu Lin1, Hongjian He1, Xu Yan2, Thorsten Feiweier3, Hui Liu2, and Jianhui Zhong1
1Center for Brain Imaging Science and Technology, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China, People's Republic of, 2MR Collaboration NE Asia, Siemens Healthcare, Shanghai, China, People's Republic of, 3Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany
Synopsis
Multi-component
diffusion models with each component of its own T2 value have been studied
previously. When the diffusion signal is decomposed into three compartments
(short, intermediate and long T2), the respective ADC values can be obtained. Our
results from simulations and in vivo measurements show that the model
successfully separates signal from different tissue types, allows extraction of
tissue-specific ADC, and results are mostly free of partial volume problem. Moreover,
an ADC without T2 effect can also be generated by combining the ADCs of all components.Introduction
Conventionally,
the diffusion signal is assumed to originate from tissue containing multiple
compartments with different characteristics [1]. The bi-exponential model based
on this assumption decomposes signal into fast/slow diffusion, but the fitted
fractions are inconsistent with histology. This may be due to the existence of multiple
T
2 components within each voxel. Previous work has found that at least three exponential
T
2 components exist in neural tissue [2]. Some studies correlated T
2 and
diffusion and showed that these T
2 components exhibited different diffusion
characteristics [3], or reported TE dependency of ADC in white matter [4], indicating
a multi-T
2 and multi-diffusion nature of biological tissue. We propose a
multi-component diffusion model to decompose diffusion-weighted signal into
three compartments (short, intermediate and long T
2), thereby obtaining the
respective ADC values of these compartments as well as an ADC without T
2 effect.
Methods
A multicomponent diffusion model is combined with T2 analysis. A T2 spectrum was calculated voxel-by-voxel using the regularized non-negative least-squares (rNNLS) approach [5], three T2 segments can be recognized separately. The signal evolution of each component can be reorganized as $$$S_{0}(TE)=\sum_{j=M}^Nx(T_{2j})e^{-TE/T_{2}}$$$, where $$$x(T_{2j})$$$ is the T2 distribution and $$$[M,N]$$$ is the range of the corresponding T2 segment. Each of the components is supposed to have a respective ADC as well, so the diffusion signal $$$y$$$ with a b-value can also be written as a sum of these components in the matrix form:$$\begin{bmatrix}y(TE_{1},b)\\y(TE_{2},b)\\...\\y(TE_{n},b)\end{bmatrix}_{n\times1}=\begin{bmatrix}S_{0s}(TE_{1})&S_{0m}(TE_{1})&S_{0l}(TE_{1})\\S_{0s}(TE_{2})&S_{0m}(TE_{2})&S_{0l}(TE_{2})\\...&...&...\\S_{0s}(TE_{n})&S_{0m}(TE_{n})&S_{0l}(TE_{n})\end{bmatrix}_{n\times3}\times\begin{bmatrix}e^{-bADC_{s}}\\e^{-bADC_{m}}\\e^{-bADC_{l}} \end{bmatrix}_{3\times1},$$ where $$$S_{0s,m,l}(TE_{n})$$$ denotes the signal of short, medium and long T2 components without diffusion weighting at the echo time $$$TE_{n}$$$, and $$$ADC_{s,m,l}$$$ are their diffusion coefficients, respectively. The ADC for each component was calculated using linear fitting. These ADCs can either be analyzed separately, or combined to obtain a single ADC using: $$ADC=\ln(\frac{S_{0s}(0)e^{-bADC_{s}}+S_{0m}(0)e^{-bADC_{m}}+S_{0l}(0)e^{-bADC_{l}}}{S_{0s}(0)+S_{0m}(0)+S_{0l}(0)})/(-b).$$
For the purpose of a time efficient acquisition and in order to enable the separation of T2 mapping and diffusion imaging, a prototype SE-EPI sequence was used for all acquisitions. The non-diffusion images were acquired with 30 logarithmically equally spaced TEs between 28ms and 230ms. The diffusion images were acquired with 13 TEs varying from the minimum 55ms to 136ms.
All scans were performed in a healthy subject on a 3T system (MAGNETOM Prisma, Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany). Other scan parameters were: FOV=220*220*3 mm3, matrix size=110*110, mono-polar diffusion gradient parallel to the readout direction, b=1000 s/mm2, δ=11.5 ms and Δ=25.9 ms, TR=4 s, 6/8 Fourier acquisition, parallel acceleration factor=2, bandwidth=2065 Hz/px. The total scan time was about 9 minutes, which is tolerable to the subject.
Results & Discussion
In the T2 distribution
spectrum (Fig. 1a) for one image slice, three peaks can be assigned to the
three components, corresponding to intra-cellular water, extra-cellular water,
and CSF [6].
However, in most of the voxels only one or two
components can be extracted, as shown in Fig. 1b.
The combined ADC map and three separate ADC maps are represented in Fig. 2. The ADC
map of short T2 component (<35 ms) is noisy (Fig. 2b), most likely due to the
fact that the minimum TE (28 ms) of non-diffusion sequence is too long comparing
to this short T2. The medium T2 component gives an ADC map of brain tissue eliminating
CSF (Fig. 2c). The long T2 component (>200 ms) has a larger ADC value than that
of the other two components. Its distribution is clearly consistent with CSF
(Fig. 2d). It is noticeable that the corpus callosum overlaps with CSF in the combined
ADC map (Fig. 2a) but is fully separated in the separate ADC maps.
We
also observed a TE dependence of ADC acquired in conventional way, as shown in
Fig. 3. The measured ADC decreased over TE in the white matter regions such as major
forceps, and increased in the grey matter regions such as the cingulate gyrus.
These changes are in agreement with the result in [4]. The combined ADCs and
their simulated trends considering T2 effect over TE are according to the
measured ADCs (Fig. 3f), illustrating that the TE dependence of ADC may due to
the T2 differences of multiple ADC components. As the TE increases, the
relative fraction of two ADC components changes accordingly and results in change
of their mean ADC. Furthermore, it is impossible to measure an ADC without T2
effect unless zero TE is used.
Conclusion
Based
on multi-exponential T
2 analysis, the proposed method is able to obtain the respective
ADC values of different tissues. Moreover, it has the capability of supplying an
ADC without T
2 effect.
Acknowledgements
No acknowledgement found.References
[1] Assaf Y, et al., JMRI, 1998, 131(1):
69-85.
[2] Does M D, MRM, 1996, 35(2): 207-213.
[3] Peled S, et al., MRM 1999, 42(5): 911-918.
[4] Qin W, et al. MRM, 2009, 61(4): 755-760.
[5] Whittall K P, et al., JMRI 1989, 84(1): 134-152.
[6] Harkins K D, et al., MRM 2012, 67(3): 793-800.