Synopsis
Frequency drifts during MRS acquisition
results in broad and distorted spectral lineshapes, a reduced SNR and
quantification errors. The consequence of frequency drifts is particularly
significant in spectral-editing sequences, because spectral editing critically relies
on narrow-band frequency selective pulses or accurate spectral alignments among
scans for subtraction/addition of spectra. Frequency drift can occur due to
subject’s movement and/or MR system instability. Even in advanced MR systems
with self-shielded gradients, significant frequency drifts occur
due to eddy current-induced heating and cooling of passive shim materials,
particularly after MR scans with heavy gradient duty cycles. The effects of frequency
drifts can be mitigated through prospective and retrospective frequency
corrections. Currently,
most spectral-editing methods use post-processing approaches to correct the effects
of frequency drifts retrospectively. In this study, we have developed
a prospective frequency correction method and implemented it in a semi-LASER
based TE-averaged sequence for glutamate detection.INTRODUCTION
Frequency drifts during MRS acquisition
results in broad and distorted spectral lineshapes, a reduced SNR, and
quantification errors. The consequence of frequency drifts is particularly
significant in spectral-editing sequences, because spectral editing critically relies
on narrow-band frequency selective pulses or accurate spectral alignments among
scans for subtraction/addition of spectra. Frequency drift can occur due to
subject’s movement and/or MR system instability. Even in advanced MR systems
with self-shielded gradients
1, significant frequency drifts occur
due to eddy current-induced heating and cooling of passive shim materials,
particularly after MR scans with heavy gradient duty cycles. The effects of frequency
drifts can be mitigated through prospective and retrospective frequency
corrections
2-7. Currently,
most spectral-editing methods use post-processing approaches to correct the effects
of frequency drifts retrospectively
8-11. In this study, we have developed
a prospective frequency correction method and implemented it in a semi-LASER
based TE-averaged sequence
12,13 for glutamate detection.
METHODS
The prospective frequency correction was
implemented by integrating an interleaved reference scan (IRS) method
2
into a semi-LASER based TE-averaged single-voxel sequence on a Skyra 3 T
scanner (Siemens, Erlangen, Germany). The IRS method includes a navigator scan
based on PRESS without water suppression and a low flip angle (10°) of the
excitation RF pulse
2. Because our primary goal was to correct the
frequency drifts, the spoiler gradients for water suppression were excluded
from the navigator scan, allowing longer recovery time and reduced saturation
effects. The navigator data containing the water signals were delivered to the
on-line reconstruction, and the peak position of water signals was used to track
the frequency drift in each scan. The frequencies of RF pulses and the receiver
were updated using the measured frequency drift in navigator data prior to the
next acquisition
5. The prospective frequency correction was tested
on phantoms and human subjects after the realistic gradient heating by 30-min
fMRI experiments with heavy duty gradient cycles. Parameters of the TE-averaged
semi-LASER sequence with and without prospective frequency correction were:
voxel size=3x3x3 cm
3,
TR=2250 ms, TE=35-355 ms in increments of 10 ms, NT=4, and bandwidth=1000 Hz.
RESULTS
The frequency drift of the water signal
in a phantom was 3.2 Hz/min determined by the linear fit (Fig. 1a), and was effectively corrected with the
prospective frequency correction (Fig. 1b). Equivalent frequency drifts of the
phantom, 3.2 Hz/min, were measured from a healthy subject (Fig. 2a), although the frequency fluctuation was greater.
The average fluctuations were ±0.29 Hz and ±0.11 Hz in the human and phantom
scans, respectively. The greater fluctuations in the human scans are attributed
to broader linewidths due to physiological motions and uncertainties in
determining the water peak position. The effective
corrections of frequency drifts in the human scans are shown in Fig. 2b. Distorted
lineshapes of NAA at 2.0 ppm, creatine at 3 and 3.9 ppm in the uncorrected
spectrum (Fig. 2b, top) have been clearly corrected after the prospective
frequency corrections (Fig. 2b, bottom). Significantly improved linewidths and SNR were visible in the spectrum with
the frequency correction, demonstrated by the narrower linewidth of NAA (5 Hz (corrected)
vs. 13 Hz (uncorrected)). Better defined
glutamate signals were also visible in the spectrum with the frequency
correction.
DISCUSSION
The proposed prospective frequency
correction method reliably corrected over 3 Hz/min frequency drifts occurred
during MRS scans in both phantom and human scans. The effect of frequency
drifts tend to be pronounced when the measurement requires longer scan times, as
for metabolites with low concentration, e.g., GABA, GSH and vitamin C, using
editing sequences. The prospective frequency correction method provides
advantages over retrospective correction methods as this method can be applied
to CSI data acquisition, which does not provide any spectral peak to track
frequency drifts. This method also allows accurate spatial localization and
consistent water suppression through real-time frequency updates of RF pulses. Combination
with prospective motion correction should further improve the accuracy of
localization and spectral quality during the presence of subject motion
4,14.
CONCLUSION
We demonstrated the enhanced spectral
quality by the effective correction of gradient heating induced frequency drifts
in a 1H MRS editing method using a prospective frequency correction
method.
Acknowledgements
This work is partly supported by the
National Institutes of Health (S10RR29577, UL1TR000001) and the Hoglund Family
Foundation.References
[1]. Foerster BU, et al, MRM (54), 1261-7, 2005.
[2]. Thiel T, et al, MRM (47), 1077-82, 2002.
[3]. Helms G, et al, MRM (46), 395-400, 2001.
[4]. Zaitsev M, et al, NMR Biomed (23), 325-32, 2010.
[5]. Lange T, et al, JMRI (33), 748-54, 2011.
[6]. Keating B, et al, MRM (68), 1339-45, 2012.
[7]. Near J, et al, MRM (73), 44-50, 2015.
[8]. Waddell KW, et al, MRI (25), 1032-8, 2007.
[9]. Evans CJ, et al, JMRI (38), 970-5, 2013.
[10]. Harris AD, et al, MRM (72), 941-8, 2014.
[11]. Bhattacharyya PK, et al, MRM (58), 808-12, 2007.
[12]. Hurd R, et al, MRM (51), 435-40, 2004.
[13]. Lin M, et al, MRM (71), 911-20, 2014.
[14]. Hess AT, et al, MRM (66), 314-23, 2011.