Ralph Noeske1 and Rolf F Schulte2
1GE Healthcare, Potsdam, Germany, 2GE Global Research, Munich, Germany
Synopsis
Echo-Planar Spectroscopic Imaging (EPSI) reduces the long acquisition
time of Chemical Shift Imaging. “Flyback” trajectories sampling the lobe only
along one direction are commonly used for robustness and artifact reasons. Main
challenge in the design is that there is
no analytic solution for an SNR optimized readout/flyback
trapezoid pair. The goal of this work was to implement a fast SNR optimized
algorithm that takes Peripheral Nerve Stimulation into account to calculate
waveforms on the fly for any given spectral and spatial resolution and
therefore doesn’t require pre-calculated waveforms.
PURPOSE
Acceleration techniques like Echo-Planar
Spectroscopic Imaging (EPSI)
1-3 reduce the long acquisition time of
Chemical Shift Imaging (CSI). The “flyback” echo-planar trajectory
4 is
more robust against gradient errors (e.g. eddy currents) compared to the
symmetric implementation. There is no analytic solution for the design of an
SNR optimized readout/flyback trapezoid pair for a given spectral and spatial
resolution.
Beside hardware constraints like maximum slew rate and
gradient strength of the gradient system physiological constraints to prevent
peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) need to be taken into account for the design
of the gradient waveform. Traditionally, a trajectory is designed for a given
set of parameters like spectral and spatial resolution and gradient system. This
waveform is checked against PNS thresholds and if violating constraints, the
trajectory is redesigned with derated gradient specifications (Smax
and/or Gmax), iterating the design until an allowed trajectory is
reached. Goal of this work is to implement an SNR-optimized algorithm that allows
calculation of the gradient waveform directly on-the-fly based on the user
prescription (e.g. bandwidth, spatial resolution) and is therefore not limited
to pre-calculated waveforms like in
5.
METHODS
Trapezoids and ramp times for the “flyback” echo planar trajectory (Fig. 1) were calculated using a dB/dt-optimized algorithm following the linear formulation of the allowable change in gradient field ΔG
lim as a function of ramp time Δt in
6 (ΔG
lim = SR
min (Δt + c)) including parameters of the gradient system (rheobase, chronaxie and effective coil length). This also took into account that the flyback EPSI readout train was just on one logical gradient axis and no gradient trapezoids during that time on the other two. Other constraints for the design of the trapezoids were the gradient system hardware that defines the maximum gradient strength and the minimum rise time for a full amplitude ramp and that only a discrete number of possible receiver bandwidths given by the maximum receiver bandwidth of the system divided by a decimation (integer) number were possible. In addition all gradient times had to be a multiple of 4μs (gradient rate) due to system constraints. The implemented algorithm to calculate the trapezoids maximizes SNR for a given set of input parameters like the field-of-view (fov), the number of sampling points in the spatial direction (res) and the spectral bandwidth which defines the maximum time of the trapezoid pair (T). Therefore the sampling time for a single data point (Δt) was maximized.
Trapezoid waveforms were calculated on the host for various prescriptions so no pre-calculated gradient waveforms for a limited number of spatial resolutions were required.
This was implemented within a Point-Resolved Spectroscopy (PRESS) sequence.
RESULTS
Results for
different gradient configurations and settings are shown in Table 1 and compared
with results reported previously
5. The results for the zoom gradient
configuration of TRM are the same for SNR Efficiency E
SNR and
spectral bandwidth 1/T for both
spatial resolutions (5mm and 10mm) shown in
5 Fig. 1.
Changing
prescription and re-calculation of waveforms led to no delay meaning the time required for the re-calculation is in the range of a few
ms.
XRMB configuration (gradient system of MR750, GE
Healthcare) shows better performance than the zoom mode of the TRM configuration
(gradient system of HDx) used in reference
5 but is limited by PNS (see column ‘
gflyb
SR’ in Table 1). PNS evaluation for the full waveform using the convolution
model demonstrate no threshold violation (Fig. 2). An example of an in-vivo 2D data set is
shown in Fig. 3.
DISCUSSION
A fast algorithm was implemented for
“flyback” echo planar trajectory optimization within a PRESS sequence that is
not only taking hardware constraints into account but also PNS and therefore supports all
different gradient systems. The applied linear formulation for PNS is slightly more conservative than the convolution model for a "flyback" EPSI train and therefore on the safe side. Thus no
pre-calculated waveforms for a limited number of spatial resolutions are
required.
Acknowledgements
No acknowledgement found.References
1. Mansfield P Spatial
mapping of the chemical shift in NMR. Magn Reson Med 1984; 1: 370-386
2. Webb P et al. A fast spectroscopic imaging method
using a blipped phase encode gradient. Magn Reson Med 1989; 12: 306-315
3. Posse S et al. High speed 1H spectroscopic imaging in human brain
by echo planar spatial–spectral encoding. Magn Reson Med 1995; 33: 34-40
4. Feinberg DA et al. Echo-planar imaging with asymmetric
gradient modulation and inner-volume excitation. Magn Reson Med 1990; 13:
162–169
5. Cunningham CH et al. Design of
Flyback Echo-Planar Readout Gradients for Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopic
Imaging. Magn Reson Med. 2005; 54(5): 1286-9
6. Chronik BA et al. Simple Linear Formulation for Magnetostimulation Specific to MRI ?Gradient Coils. Magn Reson Med. 2001; 45(5): 916-9