Synopsis
Intravoxel incoherent
motion (IVIM) MRI measures the combined effect of perfusion in the capillaries
and water diffusion in the extracellular extravascular space. However,
verification of the accuracy of IVIM is not performed routinely as it requires
a flow phantom and a pump with accurate and constant output. Our goal is to
develop a practical IVIM quality assurance method based on a simple and compact
flow phantom driven by a power injector. We have demonstrated that using a
simple phantom and a power injector as standard is feasible and can be easily
implemented on many clinical/research scannersPurpose
Quantitative IVIM parameters, molecular diffusion coefficient
[
Ds], fraction of the diffusion
linked to microcirculation of the blood [
f] and perfusion-related diffusion coefficient [
Df] are being used as biomarkers for
clinical diagnosis and treatment monitoring [1-2]. However,
verification of the accuracy and reproducibility of IVIM is not performed
routinely as it requires a flow phantom and a MR-safe flow pump with accurate and
constant output. Otherwise, long extension
of tubing would be required. Such system is complicated and costly and
therefore no quality assurance of IVIM has been performed to our best knowledge.
To provide a solution for such unmet needs, we have developed a practical IVIM
quality assurance method based on a simple and compact flow phantom driven by a
power injector which is available on most clinical MR scanners.
Materials & Methods
A flow phantom (180x180x180mm3) was made of acrylic and filled with distilled water
as stationary fluid as shown in Fig.1(top). Six polyethylene terephthalate
tubes with inner diameter of 10mm connected by L-shaped connectors were
suspended inside the chamber and immersed in water. A Spectris Solaris EP MR Injection
system (Medrad, Inc., Warrendale, PA) equipped with the MR scanner was used to inject
up to 120 mL of distilled water through the tube at a precise rate of 0.1mL/s.
Such settings generated a constant flow for about 20 minutes. The outflow of water
was directed into a small reservoir and can be reused in multiple measurements
or to verify the flow rate if necessary.
Studies were
performed on a Siemens Tim Trio 3T MR scanner. Eight slices perpendicular to
the straight sections of connected tubes were prescribed to acquire IVIM images,
as shown in Fig.1 (bottom).
The imaging parameters were: 1500ms TR, 88.4ms
TE, 256x256mm2 FOV, 256x256 acquisition matrix size, 5mm slice
thickness. 16 b-values (0,25,50,75,100,150,175,200,225,250,350,450,550,700,850 and 1000s/mm2). A phased array head coil was used for image
acquisition and the total acquisition time was 18.08 minutes, shorter than the
duration of constant flow. As shown in Fig.1, three region-of-interests (ROIs) were placed on the diffusion weighted images:
matching the cross-section area of the tube (ROI1, red circle),
including both the
tube and the stationary water (ROI2, yellow circle), and in the region of
stationary water only (ROI3, green circle).
Ds, Df and f were computed by two-step bi-exponential fitting of the
change of MRI signal with b-values using the Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm. To
demonstrate the feasibility of such IVIM QA method, three repeat
measurements were performed on the same day and another three repeat measurements
were performed one week later.
Results
Fig.2-4 shows the typical fittings of IVIM model for the average signal intensity
in ROIs 1–3. The IVIM parameters from repeated measurements are shown in
Table1. Both slow and fast diffusion components are observed for ROI1 and ROI2
while only the slow component for ROI3 as expected. The
Ds of ROI2 and ROI3 are
almost identical and close to the known water diffusion coefficient at room
temperature. For ROI1, the
Ds and
Df are different from those of ROI1 and ROI2.
However, the
f of ROI1
is also very high (~70%). Consistent results were obtained from multiple scans
with the same session as indicated by small standard deviations and between
week 1 and week 2 for ROI1 and ROI2 where
f is at 22%~24%, close to physiological range 26%~31%[1].
Discussion
The primary
results demonstrate that a consistent combination of perfusion and diffusion
can reproduced to serve as the standard for IVIM quality control. Such standard
can then be used to test accuracy of different IVIM imaging techniques and
protocols. The proposed method of MR IVIM quality assurance takes advantage of
availability of power injector which is designed and periodically tested to
produce accurate flow rate. Using the power injector avoids a dedicated flow
pump. Since the power injector can be positioned near the MR scanner, it also
allows short tubes, less fluid and easy setup. Although the power injector's minimum slow rate is 0.1ml/s, we have
demonstrated the current rate is slow enough to acquire the data to achieve
highly reproducible parameters. The quantification of IVIM parameters maybe further improved by
averaging multiple slices to improve SNR and a more robust fitting algorithm. Given
its simplicity and availability, we plan to use such QA method to test and
compare different scanner types for IVIM imaging.
Conclusion
we
have demonstrated that a fast, low-cost and effective quality control procedure
for IVIM using a simple phantom and a power injector is feasible
and can be easily implemented and performed on a typical clinical or research scanner.
Acknowledgements
No acknowledgement found.References
1. Luciani A, et al. Liver cirrhosis: intravoxel incoherent motion MR imaging--pilot study. Radiology. 2008 Dec;249(3):891-9
2. Chandarana H, et al. Diffusion-weighted intravoxel incoherent motion imaging of renal tumors with histopathologic correlation. Invest Radiol. 2012 Dec;47(12):688-96.