Accelerating Intravoxel Incoherent Motion Imaging of the Brain using k-b PCA
Georg Spinner1, Johannes Frieder Matthias Schmidt1, and Sebastian Kozerke1

1Institute for Biomedical Engineering, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland

Synopsis

In vivo Intravoxel Incoherent Motion (IVIM) parameter mapping in the brain is particularly challenging because of inherent noise amplification of parallel imaging. To address this limitation, correlations in space and in the b-value dimension may be jointly exploited. To this end, an iterative approach of k-t PCA was adapted to allow image reconstruction from undersampled IVIM data. Reconstruction and parameter estimation errors of the proposed k-b PCA approach relative to parallel imaging were assessed. Mean absolute parameter errors of k-b PCA were lower compared to CG-SENSE (R=4): 1.3±1.9·10-4/1.8±2.0·10-4 mm2/s (D) 0.068±0.083/0.085±0.101 (f) and 6.4±16.9·10-2/7.6±18.3·10-2 mm2/s (D*). It is concluded that k-b PCA is a promising alternative to parallel imaging to reduce scan times while maintaining the quality of diffusion and perfusion parameter maps in brain exams.

Introduction

The Intravoxel Incoherent Motion (IVIM) (1) model in combination with parallel imaging (R=2) has successfully been used clinically to map perfusion in the brain (2). Parallel imaging, however, inherently reduces the signal-to-noise ratio along with spatially dependent noise amplification and therefore undersampling factors beyond a factor of two are difficult to implement for IVIM in practice. To exploit the redundancy among the diffusion-weighted images (DWI) acquired for IVIM, constrained image reconstruction methods operating in the spatio-principal component space may be utilized.

It is the objective of the present work to implement and validate k-t PCA (3,4) for IVIM. Using in-vivo brain data, IVIM parameter maps of diffusion (D), perfusion fraction (f) and pseudo-diffusion (D*) are compared relative to maps derived from parallel imaging and fully sampled data.

Methods

Iterative k-t PCA (5) was implemented to reconstruct data obtained with optimized k-b sampling (referred to as k-b PCA). Here b denotes the dimension spanned by DWI data acquired at different b-values. In k-b PCA, data consistency is enforced along with a regularization term to incorporate information from low-resolution data acquired alongside and decomposed into spatially dependent weights and b-dependent basis functions. Accordingly, image reconstruction is performed in x-pc space (5):

$$\min_{\vec{i}} \|E\vec{i}-\vec{d}\|_{2}^{2}+\lambda\|\left(^{x-pc}M\right)^{-1}B_{f\rightarrow pc}F_{b\rightarrow f}\vec{i}\|_{2}^{2} \qquad (1)$$

here $$$E$$$ denotes the forward encoding operator, $$$d$$$ the acquired k-b space data, $$$M$$$ low resolution data, $$$F_{b\rightarrow f}$$$ and $$$F_{f\rightarrow pc}$$$ transform operators and λ a regularization parameter.

For reference, CG-SENSE reconstruction (6) was implemented and performed on each b-image separately. Coil calibration data for both k-b PCA and CG-SENSE were obtained from a separate fully sampled coil calibration scan.
Datasets from 6 healthy volunteers (female, age: 22.8±3.5 years, weight: 61.7±7.5 kg) were obtained on a 3T Philips Achieva scanner (Philips Healthcare, Best, the Netherlands) equipped with an 8-channel head coil using dedicated pads (Pearltec, Zurich, Switzerland) for head fixation. Single-shot diffusion-weighted spin-echo EPI data were collected with a FOV of 194x150x80 mm3, voxel size 1.2x1.2x4 mm3, TE=179 ms, TR=4000 ms, 20 slices and 16 b-values (7) (range: 0-1000 s/mm2) encoded along three orthogonal directions in a total scan time of 6:24 min for the fully sampled reference.

The reconstruction error in the region of the brain including CSF for net 1.8 to 4.0-fold undersampling factors was quantified for both k-b PCA and CG-SENSE using the normalized root mean square error (NRMSE) relative to the fully sampled reference. IVIM parameter maps were derived using a segmented least-squares fit of the IVIM model as described in (8). The parameter estimation error of D, f and D* is reported for images reconstructed from undersampled and fully sampled data.

Results

Spatially dependent noise amplification in the mages reconstructed with CG-SENSE is readily apparent, while k-b PCA reconstructed images show reduced overall noise (Fig. 1). The reconstruction error (NRMSE) for a net undersampling factor of R=4 and b=0 s/mm2 was 10.2±1.0 % for CG-SENSE and 10.1±5.6 % for k-b PCA (λ=10-9) over all volunteers. For b=1000 s/mm2, the mean and standard deviation of NRMSE over all volunteers and diffusion encoding directions was 61.2±6.2 % for CG-SENSE and 27.0±6.2 % for k-b PCA. Fig. 2 displays the reconstruction error as a function of net undersampling factor R for one volunteer. An analysis of different regularization parameters λ (Fig. 3) revealed that the reconstruction error decreased with increasing λ leveling off between 10-9 and 10-8. While IVIM parameter maps reconstructed based on CG-SENSE data were noisy especially around the ventricles, k-b PCA resulted in improved estimates, in particular for D and f.

Example parameter maps of one volunteer are shown in Fig. 4. The absolute parameter estimation errors as for an (effective) undersampling factor of R=4 using CG-SENSE and k-b PCA were 1.8±2.0·10-4 mm2/s and 1.3±1.9·10-4 mm2/s for D, 0.085±0.101 and 0.068±0.083 for f and 7.6±18.3·10-2 and 6.4±16.9·10-2 mm2/s for D* as shown in Fig. 5.

Discussion

In this work k-b PCA has been implemented to exploit redundancy among diffusion-weighted images thereby improving accelerated IVIM of the brain. In contrast to CG-SENSE reconstruction, 4-fold accelerated k-b PCA allowed reconstructing IVIM parameter maps comparable to those derived from fully sampled images. Since undersampling simultaneously allows for a shorter EPI readout and correspondingly lower echo times, the relative signal-to-noise ratio penalty due to reduced data acquisition is partly compensated for.

Conclusion

Accelerating IVIM using k-b PCA is a promising alternative to parallel imaging to reduce scan times while maintaining the quality of diffusion and perfusion parameter maps in brain exams.

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by VPH-DARE@IT.

References

1. Le Bihan D, Breton E, Lallemand D, Aubin ML, Vignaud J, Laval-Jeantet M. Separation of diffusion and perfusion in intravoxel incoherent motion MR imaging. Radiology 1988;168:497–505. doi: 10.1148/radiology.168.2.3393671.

2. Federau C, O’Brien K, Meuli R, Hagmann P, Maeder P. Measuring brain perfusion with intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM): Initial clinical experience. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2014;39:624–632. doi: 10.1002/jmri.24195.

3. Pedersen H, Kozerke S, Ringgaard S, Nehrke K, Won YK. K-t PCA: Temporally constrained k-t BLAST reconstruction using principal component analysis. Magn. Reson. Med. 2009;62:706–716. doi: 10.1002/mrm.22052.

4. Petzschner FH, Ponce IP, Blaimer M, Jakob PM, Breuer F a. Fast MR parameter mapping using k-t principal component analysis. Magn. Reson. Med. 2011;66:706–16. doi: 10.1002/mrm.22826.

5. Schmidt JFM, Wissmann L, Manka R, Kozerke S. Iterative k-t principal component analysis with nonrigid motion correction for dynamic three-dimensional cardiac perfusion imaging. Magn. Reson. Med. 2014;72:68–79. doi: 10.1002/mrm.24894.

6. Pruessmann KP, Weiger M, Börnert P, Boesiger P. Advances in sensitivity encoding with arbitrary k-space trajectories. Magn. Reson. Med. 2001;46:638–651. doi: 10.1002/mrm.1241.

7. Lemke A, Stieltjes B, Schad LR, Laun FB. Toward an optimal distribution of b values for intravoxel incoherent motion imaging. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2011;29:766–76. doi: 10.1016/j.mri.2011.03.004.

8. Notohamiprodjo M, Chandarana H, Mikheev A, Rusinek H, Grinstead J, Feiweier T, Raya JG, Lee VS, Sigmund EE. Combined intravoxel incoherent motion and diffusion tensor imaging of renal diffusion and flow anisotropy. Magn. Reson. Med. 2014;00:1–7. doi: 10.1002/mrm.25245.

Figures

Figure 1: Reconstructed magnitude and difference imaging of one volunteer for CG-SENSE and k-b PCA relative the to fully sampled reference for three b-values and a net undersampling factor of R=4.

Figure 2: Reconstruction error as a function of net undersampling factor. Circles indicate the mean of the normalized root mean square error (NRMSE) of all reconstructed images (b-values and diffusion encoding directions), error bars indicate the corresponding standard deviation.

Figure 3: Reconstruction error for a net undersampling factor of R=4 as a function of regularization factor. Circles indicate the mean of normalized root mean square error (NRMSE) of all reconstructed images (b-values and diffusion encoding directions) of all volunteers, error bars indicate the corresponding standard deviation.

Figure 4: Example IVIM parameter maps of one volunteer for a net undersampling factor of R=4.

Figure 5: Absolute IVIM parameter estimation error. Circles indicate the mean of absolute parameter error over all voxels and volunteers, while error bars indicate corresponding standard deviations.



Proc. Intl. Soc. Mag. Reson. Med. 24 (2016)
4222