Lyu Li1, Zechen Zhou1, Bida Zhang2, Bin Xie2, Feng Huang3, Chun Yuan4, and Hua Guo1
1Center for Biomedical Imaging Research, Department of Biomedical Engineering, School of Medicine, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China, People's Republic of, 2Healthcare Department, Philips Research China, Shanghai, China, People's Republic of, 3Philips Healthcare (Suzhou) Co., Ltd., Suzhou, China, People's Republic of, 4Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States
Synopsis
Occlusion of lenticulostriate arteries (LSAs)
were reported to lead to lacunar infarction. Currently, the major technique to
image LSAs is digital subtraction angiography (DSA) for its high resolution and
good definition of small vessels. For MRI, qualified images of LSAs can only be
acquired from 7T scanners in recent studies. In this abstract, we optimized a
technique independent of in-flow effect called flow-sensitive black-blood
(FSBB). With this optimized method, qualified images of LSAs can be achieved on
a 3T scanner, which makes it more practical for imaging LSAs using MRI in
clinical applications.Purpose
Occlusion of lenticulostriate arteries (LSAs) were
reported to lead to lacunar infarction
[1,2]. Currently, the major
technique to image LSAs is digital subtraction angiography (DSA) for its high
resolution and good definition of small vessels
[3]. However, the
clinical use of DSA is restricted by its invasiveness and simple image contrast.
Recently, ultra-high field (7T) MRI scanner has achieved qualified images using
time-of-flight (TOF) Magnetic resonance angiography (MRA)
[4,5]. But
LSAs with diameters range from approximately 0.3 to 0.7 mm
[4] are
difficult to be imaged on clinical MRI systems. Recently, one technique
independent of in-flow effect, flow-sensitive black-blood (FSBB), was reported
to image LSAs at 3T
[6]. In this study, we aim to optimize the flow-dephasing
gradients (FDG) in FSBB for LSAs imaging at 3T.
Methods
In FSBB sequence, one usually applies FDG in
all three directions to achieve a greater gradient moment for more efficient
blood suppression than in only one direction. However, the net direction of them
is not aligned with the main flow direction of LSAs, thus it is not optimized. Since
the gradients are applied to all vessels, the net direction should be aligned
with the overall flow direction of the vessels interested, which can be
estimated by an equation:$$V_i\sim\sum_k(|\sum_jv_{i,j,k}\cdot\triangle
l_{j,k}|/\sum_j\triangle l_{j,k}),(i=x,y,z)$$We assume that one vessel can be divided into
a group of unit vessels with single flow direction. $$$v_i$$$ denotes the overall
flow direction vector projection along $$$i$$$ axis. $$$v_{i,j,k}$$$ denotes
the projection of the vessel unit flow direction along $$$i$$$ axis. $$$\triangle
l_{j,k}$$$ denotes the vessel unit length. $$$k$$$ denotes the index of vessels
and $$$j$$$ denotes the vessel unit position in vessel $$$k$$$. Absolute value is
used to prevent cancelation of opposite flow. Here, we assume LSAs structure of
adults and their overall projection on x-y-z axes are similar. According to a cursory
calculation, flow component of the foot to head (FH) direction is dominant. We
apply the FDG only in FH direction in FSBB as an example (Figure 1). By this
means, we can save nearly half of the scan time, due to the increased duty
cycle when only one direction gradient is used.
In-vivo experiments
were performed on a Philips 3.0T Achieva TX MRI scanner (Philips Healthcare,
Best, The Netherlands) equipped with a 32-channel head coil. In the original
FSBB sequence, the scan parameters were TR/TE=59/13ms, FA=14$$$^\circ$$$, FOV=200×190×50mm3, acquisition
voxel size=0.5×0.5×1mm3, BW=144.4Hz/pixel, m1=1107ms2·mT/m
(in the resultant gradient direction), scan time=8min50sec with SENSE factor=2. In the modified FSBB sequence, TR/TE=30/13ms, m1=639ms2·mT/m
(in FH direction), scan time=8min56sec with SENSE factor=1, other parameters were
the same with the original FSBB.
Results
We acquired data in coronal and transverse planes respectively using FSBB
and modified FSBB. Minimum intensity projection (mIP) was used for coronal
slabs (Figure 2). The white arrows show the LSAs imaged which are more visualized
in (a) and (c) than (b) and (d) because of higher SNR. (b) suffers much greater
noise than (d) because SENSE was used in FH direction in which the coil
sensitivity variation is limited. LSAs seem sharper in (a) than (c) due to its
higher resolution after all the images reformatted to coronal plane. To avoid noisy
images and keep scan time reasonable, the modified FSBB is proved effective.
Discussion
The
results show it is feasible to image the LSAs, which are susceptible to noise, at
3T. A large net gradient moment can be achieved when applying the gradients in
all three directions, but the m1 value is comparable between the original FSBB
and the modified FSBB if we only consider about the LSAs. Small gradients will
keep TR short so that SENSE is not essential. Compared with the original FSBB using
SENSE=2, it can be proved that the SNR, which is a key point, is still improved
for the modified FSBB although its TR is short. So applying resultant gradient
in the overall flow direction of the LSAs will make FSBB more efficient in SNR.
However, there are still a few LSAs that can only be seen in the original FSBB
(yellow arrows). The reasons may be these vessels are perpendicular to the FH
direction or they are almost parallel to the resultant gradient direction in original
FSBB with extremely slow flow.
Conclusions
A flow
dephasing gradients optimization algorithm for targeting
imaging vessels is proposed in this work. The
in-vivo results prove the optimized flow dephasing gradients can improve
the image SNR while maintaining the blood suppression efficiency. This technique makes FSBB
more practical and robust in LSAs imaging at 3T for clinical applications.
Acknowledgements
No acknowledgement found.References
1. Feekes
JA, et al. Ann Neurol, 2005.
2. Feekes JA, et al. Brain, 2006.
3. Kang H.S, et al. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol, 2005.
4. Zwanenburg J. J, et al. ISMRM, 2007.
5. Kang, C, et al. MRM, 2009.
6. Sachi Okuchi, et al. Academic Radiology, 2014.