PolyFT: a Freely-Available Optimized MATLAB Implementation of the Polyhedral Fourier Transform for Analytical Simulations in MRI
Shuo Han1 and Daniel A. Herzka1

1Department of Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States

Synopsis

Analytical Fourier transforms (FT), such as FT of 2D and 3D Shepp-Logan phantoms, enable accurate arbitrary k-space sampling of digital phantoms. Here, we present and demonstrate a computationally efficient MATLAB implementation of the analytical FT of polyhedral phantoms with uniform intensity or non-uniform intensities. The computation time of the implementation is presented, as well as demonstrations showing its feasibility of simulating physiologically relevant phantoms and evaluating non-Cartesian sampling trajectories and parallel imaging algorithms. The implementation is now available through the Mathworks user community and GitHub.

Purpose

To demonstrate a freely-available software tool for utilizing the polyhedral Fourier transform to simulate physiologically relevant phantoms.

Introduction

Analytical Fourier transforms (FT) enable accurate arbitrary k-space sampling of digital phantoms. Most digital phantoms with analytical FTs are comprised of simple shapes (e.g. cubes and ellipsoids) whose analytical FT expressions are known. The standard is the 2D and 3D Shepp-Logan phantom, which utilizes ellipses and ellipsoids.1 Recently, a closed form expression for the analytical FT of polyhedral meshes was presented, enabling simulations of physiologically relevant shapes with uniform intensity,2 or non-uniform intensities.3 Here, we present and demonstrate a computationally efficient MATLAB (The Mathworks, Natick, MA) implementation of the polyhedral FT, polyFT.m, targeted to perform MRI acquisition and reconstruction simulations using physiologically relevant shapes.

Methods

1. Implementation

Two implementations are incorporated into polyFT.m. The first one uses only MATLAB and is highly optimized, while the second one includes mex files (compiled C files callable from MATLAB) to improve computational speed. As mex files require an operating system (OS) dependent compiler, the cross-platform MATLAB-only implementation is designed for ease of use without requiring the capacity to compile mex files.

The equations of the polyhedral FT include several layers of summation, 2 making the computations amenable to parallelization. Hence, both implementations are designed to utilize the Parallel Computing Toolbox (PCT) of MATLAB, taking advantage of multiple CPUs. If the PCT is not available, polyFT.m utilizes standard for-loops.

2. Functionality

PolyFT.m enables the computation of analytical FT of phantoms with uniform or non-uniform intensity. A closed surface mesh is required for the phantom with uniform intensity. The mesh can include polygonal faces with varying number of edges; however, a constant number of edges results in faster computational speed. A tetrahedral volume mesh is required for the phantom with non-uniform intensities, and intensities are individually assigned to each tetrahedron comprising the mesh. Smaller tetrahedrons lead to emulation of smoother intensity variations though increase computation time.

3. Demonstrations

PolyFT.m is packaged with additional demos that compute the FTs of simple polyhedra, such as cubes, ellipsoids, and dodecahedrons, and a realistic brain surface mesh (Figures 1 and 2).4 Additionally, a demo comparing 3D Cartesian and stack-of-stars sampling is also provided. 8 (Figure 3) PolyFT.m can also be used in simulations involving shapes with non-uniform intensities such as coils sensitivity profiles and enables analytical evaluation of both acquisition and reconstruction algorithms. Thus, a simple demo utilizing a simulated 8-channel sensitivity map 5 and Generalized Partially Parallel Acquisitions 6, 7 (GRAPPA) is provided as well. (Figure 4).

4. Evaluation of Computational Time

The computation time of mex implementation and the MATLAB-only implementation were compared using release 2015b on a MacBook Pro with four 2.7 GHz Intel Core i7 CPUs and 16 GB DDR3 memory. K-space points and faces were varied and total computation time and computation time per k-point per face were recorded. Three-run averages are reported.

Results

Table 1 shows the computational time of two implementations. Both display similar computational speed (~ 90 ns / k-point / triangular face) though the MATLAB-only implementation was slower when larger meshes with more faces were used or when the number of k-space points increased.

Discussion

PolyFT.m can provide a platform for the evaluation of the performance of advanced acquisition strategies and reconstruction algorithms. The use of physiologically relevant digital phantoms can make development more efficient by avoiding the expenses of physical experiments.

The polyhedral FT is computationally intensive. Hence, significant effort was devoted to optimizing performance across all OSs. By incorporating parallelization, large simulations involving complex meshes can be performed efficiently

Conclusions

A highly efficient MATLAB implementation of the analytical polyhedral Fourier transforms, polyFT.m, is presented. PolyFT.m allows users to get Fourier transforms of polyhedral phantoms with uniform or non-uniform intensity enabling the digital evaluation of arbitrary k-space sampling trajectories and advanced reconstruction algorithms. The package is now available through the Mathworks user community and GitHub (https://github.com/Shuo-Han/polyFT).

Acknowledgements

No acknowledgement found.

References

[1] Koay Cheng, et al. Three-dimensional analytical magnetic resonance imaging phantom in the Fourier domain. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine. 2007;58(2): 430-436.

[2] Ngo T, et al. Realistic Analytical Polyhedral MRI Phantoms. Magnetic resonance in medicine. 2015.

[3] Han S, Herzka D. Polyhedral Phantom Framework with Analytical Fourier Transform with Intensity Gradients. In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Meeting of ISMRM, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 2015;2472.

[4] Han X, et al. CRUISE: cortical reconstruction using implicit surface evolution. NeuroImage. 2004; 23(3):997-1012.

[5] Seiberlich, N, et al. Improved radial GRAPPA calibration for real-time free-breathing cardiac imaging. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine. 2011;65(2): 492-505.

[6] Griswold M, et al. Generalized autocalibrating partially parallel acquisitions (GRAPPA). Magnetic resonance in medicine. 2002;47(6):1202-1210.

[7] Uecker M, et al. ESPIRiT—an eigenvalue approach to autocalibrating parallel MRI: where SENSE meets GRAPPA. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine. 2014;71(3):990-1001.

[8] Kecskemeti S, et al. High resolution three-dimensional cine phase contrast MRI of small intracranial aneurysms using a stack of stars k-space trajectory. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging. 2012; 35(3):518-527.

Figures

Figure 1: Meshes and isosurfaces of reconstructions of simple polyhedra. All phantoms use 128x128x128 3D Cartesian k-space sampling. (A and D): 12 face dodecahedron; (B and E): 760 triangular face ellipsoid. (C and F): 12 triangular face cube.

Figure 2: Mesh and isosuface of reconstruction of a brain phantom. The phantom has 128x128X128 3D Cartesian sampling. (C and D) are the magnified sections within the boxes of (A and B), respectively.

Figure 3: comparison between 129x129x129 3D Cartesian sampling and 129x203x129 stack-of-star sampling. (A). Mesh of the phantom. (B). Representation of stack-of-star sampling pattern. (C). Reconstruction of Cartesian sampling. (D) Reconstruction of stack-of-star sampling. (E) Differences between (C) and (D) x10.

Figure 4: simulation of parallel imaging. Gaussian noise was added to the calculated k-space. 128x128x128 sampling with 32 auto-calibration signal lines. (A). Fully sampled reference. (B). 8 channel sensitivity map from ref. 5(C) R = 2 down-sampled reconstruction. (D). GRAPPA reconstruction. (E). Difference between (A) and (D) x10.

Table 1: Computation time of the two implementations and average time per k-sample per triangular face.



Proc. Intl. Soc. Mag. Reson. Med. 24 (2016)
3197