Thanh D. Nguyen1, Kofi Deh1, Sneha Pandya1, Yi Wang1, and Susan A. Gauthier1
1Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, United States
Synopsis
The purpose of this study was to measure the inter-scanner
reproducibility of fast myelin water fraction (MWF) mapping using a 4 min FAST-T2 sequence on three scanners from two vendors at 1.5T and 3T. Regional MWF measurements obtained in 7 healthy volunteers were
highly reproducible with excellent inter-scanner correlation (R>0.95) and small MWF bias of less than 1%.PURPOSE
Myelin water fraction (MWF) (1,2) is a promising
quantitative biomarker of myelin loss and repair in multiple sclerosis (3),
which has been validated by histopathology (4,5). However, the translation of
MWF mapping into clinical MRI has been hindered by long acquisition time (>10
min) and noisy maps (6-10). To address these challenges, Fast Acquisition with
Spiral Trajectory and T2prep (FAST-T2) has been developed recently to reduce
whole brain scan time to 4 min while producing reliable MWF maps with excellent
intra-scanner reproducibility (11). The purpose of this study was to evaluate
the inter-scanner reproducibility of FAST-T2 myelin mapping on three scanners
from two vendors at the clinically relevant field strengths of 1.5T and 3T.
METHODS
Imaging experiment. Seven healthy volunteers (29 years ± 7) were imaged within 5 days on three commercial
whole-body scanners: 1.5T GE HD23 (33 mT/m gradient strength, 120 T/m/s slew
rate), 3T GE LX Echospeed (40 mT/m, 150 T/m/s), and 3T Siemens Biograph mMR (45
mT/m, 200 T/m/s). The scanners are located in three separate buildings on the
same medical campus and will be referred to as 1.5T Vendor 1, 3T Vendor 1, and
3T Vendor 2. Typical FAST-T2 parameters: 192x192x32 matrix, 24 cm FOV, 5 mm
slice, spiral TR/TE = 7.8-9.2/0.5-0.8 ms with 32 spiral leaves, 6 geometric TEs
as in (11), 10 ms adiabatic T2prep, 4 min whole brain scan time. An 8-channel
brain coil and a 20-channel head coil was used for signal reception on scanners
from Vendor 1 and 2, respectively.
Data analysis. MWF maps were extracted using a multi-voxel
spatially constrained non-linear least squares algorithm with a L-BFGS
iterative solver (11). The regularization parameter and the stopping criteria
(<1e-3 relative change in objective function, max 150 iterations) were fixed
for all data. Source images and MWF maps were co-registered using FLIRT algorithm
(12). ROI analysis was performed in five major WM (genu and splenium of corpus
callosum, minor forceps, major forceps, internal capsules) and three major GM
(putamen, caudate head, thalamus) regions. The reproducibility of regional and
voxel-wise MWF measurements was assessed using regression and correlation
analysis, Bland-Altman plots, as well as coefficient of variance (COV).
RESULTS
Figure 1 shows an example of high quality MWF
maps with good visual agreement obtained with FAST-T2 on the three different
MRI scanners, particularly at 3T. Regional MWF measurements were found to be
highly reproducible with excellent inter-scanner correlation (R>0.95) and
small MWF bias of under 1% (Fig.2). There was a stronger MWF agreement between 3T
scanners (Bland-Altman 95% limits of agreement [-2.3%,1.9%] for 3T Vendor 1 vs.
3T Vendor 2) compared to that between a 1.5T and a 3T scanner ([-1.8%,3.1%] for
1.5T Vendor 1 vs. 3T Vendor 1 and [-1.7%,3.5%] for 1.5T Vendor 1 vs. 3T Vendor
2). Reflecting this trend, the average COV for regional MWF measured in WM was 3.7
± 0.9% for 3T Vendor 1 vs. 3T Vendor 2, which was
better than COV values of 5.1 ± 2.0% for 1.5T Vendor 1 vs. 3T Vendor 1 and 5.2 ± 2.9% for 1.5T Vendor 1 vs. 3T Vendor 2. On a per voxel
basis over the whole brain, the inter-scanner agreement was moderate (mean
correlation R~0.7, mean MWF bias <1%, and mean 95% limits of agreement
within ±6%, n=7).
DISCUSSION
Our
preliminary data obtained in healthy volunteers demonstrated that fast whole
brain myelin mapping using the recently developed 4 min FAST-T2 sequence has
high inter-scanner reproducibility on a regional basis among the three MRI platforms
considered in this study. The better agreement observed between the two 3T
scanners can be attributed to the approximately double SNR advantage of 3T vs.
1.5T acquisition. FAST-T2 shows similar reproducibility to the conventional slower
acquisition methods (13,14), although it must be noted that previous studies
mainly focused on scanners from a single vendor. A limitation of this study is
a lack of MS patients, which will be addressed in our future work. In
conclusion, FAST-T2 has the potential to provide a clinically reliable imaging
tool for multi-center study and drug trials in MS.
Acknowledgements
No acknowledgement found.References
1. MacKay A, Whittall
K, Adler J, et al. In vivo visualization of myelin water in brain by magnetic
resonance. Magn Reson Med. 1994;31(6):673-7.
2. Deoni SC, Rutt BK,
Arun T, et al. Gleaning multicomponent T1 and T2 information from steady-state
imaging data. Magn Reson Med. 2008;60(6):1372-87.
3.
Laule C, Vavasour
IM, Moore GR, et al. Water content and myelin water fraction in multiple
sclerosis. A T2 relaxation study. J Neurol. 2004;251(3):284-93.
4.
McCreary CR,
Bjarnason TA, Skihar V, et al. Multiexponential T2 and magnetization transfer
MRI of demyelination and remyelination in murine spinal cord. NeuroImage.
2009;45(4):1173-82.
5. Laule C, Kozlowski
P, Leung E, et al. Myelin water imaging of multiple sclerosis at 7 T:
correlations with histopathology. NeuroImage. 2008;40(4):1575-80.
6. Kolind S, Matthews
L, Johansen-Berg H, et al. Myelin water imaging reflects clinical variability
in multiple sclerosis. NeuroImage 2012;60(1):263-70.
7. Kolind SH, Madler
B, Fischer S, et al. Myelin water imaging: Implementation and development at
3.0T and comparison to 1.5T measurements. Magn Reson Med. 2009;62(1):106-15.
8.
Nguyen TD,
Wisnieff C, Cooper MA, et al. T2 prep three-dimensional spiral imaging with
efficient whole brain coverage for myelin water quantification at 1.5 tesla. Magn
Reson Med. 2012;67(3):614-21.
9.
Prasloski T, Rauscher
A, MacKay AL, et al. Rapid whole cerebrum myelin water imaging using a 3D GRASE
sequence. NeuroImage 2012;63(1):533-9.
10. Nam Y, Lee J,
Hwang D, et al. Improved estimation of myelin water fraction using complex
model fitting. Neuroimage. 2015;116:214-21.
11. Nguyen TD, Deh K,
Monohan E, et al. Feasibility and reproducibility of whole brain myelin water
mapping in 4 minutes using Fast Acquisition with Spiral Trajectory and
adiabatic T2prep (FAST-T2) at 3 Tesla. Magn Reson Med. 2015 Aug 29. doi:
10.1002/mrm.25877. [Epub ahead of print].
12. Jenkinson M,
Bannister P, Brady M, et al. Improved optimization for the robust and accurate
linear registration and motion correction of brain images. NeuroImage
2002;17(2):825-41.
13. Meyers SM, Laule
C, Vavasour IM, et al. Reproducibility of myelin water fraction analysis: a
comparison of region of interest and voxel-based analysis methods. Magn Reson
Imaging. 2009;27(8):1096-103.
14. Meyers SM, Vavasour IM, Madler B, et al. Multicenter
measurements of myelin water fraction and geometric mean T2 : Intra- and
intersite reproducibility. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2013;38(6):1445-53.