Dynamic, T2-Weighted, Single-Shot Fast Spin Echo with Variable Refocusing Flip Angle and Cylindrical Navigator for Retrospective Respiratory Compensation
Daniel V Litwiller1, Erik Tryggestad2, Kiaran McGee3, Yuji Iwadate4, Lloyd Estkowski5, and Ersin Bayram6

1Global MR Applications & Workflow, GE Healthcare, New York, NY, United States, 2Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States, 3Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States, 4Global MR Applications & Workflow, GE Healthcare, Hino, Tokyo, Japan, 5Global MR Applications & Workflow, GE Healthcare, Menlo Park, CA, United States, 6Global MR Applications & Workflow, GE Healthcare, Houston, TX, United States

Synopsis

Here we present a multi-slice, multi-phase, single-shot fast spin echo sequence with variable refocusing flip angle and interleaved cylindrical reference navigator for retrospective respiratory-guided image sorting for the purpose of managing motion in the context of MR-guided radiation therapy treatment planning.

Purpose

MR-based radiation therapy treatment planning (RTP) may offer a number of benefits over the existing, CT-based standard of care, such as the lack of ionizing radiation, and superior soft-tissue contrast for improved target and at-risk organ delineation. Many challenges remain, however, with motion management identified as one of the top needs for MR-based RTP, especially in the chest and abdomen.1 Various approaches to characterizing respiratory motion with MRI have been proposed, however this remains an active area of research.2,3 The purpose of this work was to develop and test a multi-slice multi-phase single-shot fast spin echo (SSFSE, or HASTE, SSH-TSE, etc.) sequence incorporating variable refocusing flip angle (vrfSSFSE) and an interleaved cylindrical navigator, for rapid, T2-weighted imaging with retrospective respiratory compensation.

Methods

A vrfSSFSE pulse sequence was modified to support ungated multi-slice multi-phase imaging and the acquisition of a single, cylindrical navigator profile between imaging shots (Figure 1). This navigator profile was collected as a retrospective reference only, and not utilized for gating. Phantom and volunteer scanning was performed on a wide-bore 3.0T MRI scanner (MR750w, GE Healthcare, Waukesha, WI). T2-weighted images of a phantom undergoing periodic motion in the S/I direction were acquired with the multi-slice multi-phase vrfSSFSE pulse sequence and the following imaging parameters: coronal plane, 3 slices, 40 phases, TR = 677 ms (1.48 frames per second), TE = 80 ms, FOV = 40 x 36 cm, 5 mm slice, 256 x 224 matrix, ±125 kHz bandwidth, 0.64 effective NEX, 2x acceleration (ARC, GE Healthcare, Waukesha, WI), and refocusing flip angle targets4 of 130, 90, 100 and 45 degrees, respectively. The navigator profile was placed in the S/I direction across the edge of the phantom. Following informed consent, T2-weighted volunteer images were acquired for 20 slices and 20 phases with the same parameters listed above, and with slightly modified parameters, as follows: full-NEX, 3x ARC acceleration, TR = 458 ms (2.18 frames per second), TE = 95 ms, and a minimum refocusing flip target of 60°. (Note, the imaging TR includes both the length of the navigator and vrfSSFSE waveforms.) In all cases, the acquisition order was interleaved for both slice and phase to allow maximum recovery time between subsequent acquisitions of the same slice. For in vivo imaging, the cylindrical navigator was placed across the dome of the liver to record its position before each imaging shot. The displacements measured at the navigator TE were interpolated via cubic spline to each respective vrfSSFSE image TE, and then used to retrospectively sort the images by S/I position.

Results

Phantom imaging results are summarized in Figure 1, which shows the navigator-derived position data through time (1a), the same position data, retrospectively sorted by image location and position (1b). The retrospectively sorted phantom image data for a single, representative image location is shown in Figure 2, where the green line represents the phantom’s maximum excursion in the S-direction. In vivo results are summarized in Figure 3, showing a composite image of all phases for a single slice acquired with a minimum refocusing flip angle of 90° (3a), and all phases of the same slice acquired with a minimum refocusing flip angle of 60° (3b). Figure 4 includes two examples of typical, intermittent image shading due to cardiac motion for minimum refocusing flip angles of 90° vs. 60°, respectively.

Discussion

These results demonstrate the performance of a dynamic, T2-weighted vrfSSFSE pulse sequence with an integrated cylindrical reference navigator for retrospective respiratory compensation. As previously reported5, the reduced SAR associated with vrfSSFSE cuts the minumum TR by an approximate factor of 2, which allows higher frame rates for multi-phase imaging than could otherwise could be safely achieved with SSFSE at 3.0T. The full-Fourier acquisition has been shown to provide improved sharpness and image SNR5, though for the relatively low-resolution acquisition tested here, the sole apparent advantage of the more aggressive vrfSSFSE protocol (60° minimum flip) is in the nearly 50% higher frame rate. The shortened TRs available with vrfSSFSE are achieved at the expense of increased motion sensitivity.6 As seen in the full-Fourier acquisition, the liver signal is less consistent due to increased susceptibility to cardiac motion. In the context of a redundant, multi-phase acquisition, however, the opportunity to reject such image artifacts is greater than for routine, anatomical imaging.

Conclusion

We have demonstrated the feasibility of a rapid, dynamic, T2-weighted vrfSSFSE sequence for navigator-guided retrospective respiratory compensation. We believe this is one approach to motion management in MRI that may prove to be useful in the context of MR-guided radiation therapy treatment planning.

Acknowledgements

No acknowledgement found.

References

1. McGee KP, Hu Y, Tryggestad E, Brinkmann D, Witte B, Welker K, Panda A, Haddock M, Bernstein MA. MRI in radiation oncology: Underserved needs. Magn Reson Med. 2015 Jul 14.

2. Tryggestad E, Flammang A, Han-Oh S, Hales R, Herman J, McNutt T, Roland T, Shea SM, Wong J. Respiration-based sorting of dynamic MRI to derive representative 4D-MRI for radiotherapy planning. Med Phys. 2013 May;40(5).

3. Hu Y, Caruthers SD, Low DA, Parikh PJ, Mutic S. Respiratory amplitude guided 4-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013 May 1;86(1):198-204.

4. Busse RF, Hariharan H, Vu A, Brittain JH. Fast spin echo sequences with very long echo trains: design of variable refocusing flip angle schedules and generation of clinical T2 contrast. Magn Reson Med 2006 May;55(5):1030-7.

5. Loening AM, Saranathan M, Ruangwattanapaisarn N, Litwiller DV, Shimakawa A, Vasanawala SS. Increased speed and image quality in single-shot fast spin echo imaging via variable refocusing flip angles. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2015 Jun 19.

6. Litwiller DV, Holmes JH, Saranathan M, Loening AM, Glockner JF, Vasanawala SS, Bayram E. Sensitivity of modulated refocusing flip angle single-shot fast spin echo to impulsive cardiac-like motion. Proceedings of the ISMRM 2014.

Figures

Figure 1. Navigator data for a phantom undergoing periodic motion. a) Unsorted navigator profiles and edge position measured at the navigator TE (red +) and interpolated to the image TE (green +). b) Navigator profiles retrospectively sorted by slice (3 total) and then edge position.

Figure 2. Phantom images for a single, representative slice, retrospectively sorted by interpolated edge position at the image TE.

Figure 3. In vivo results. a) All 20 phases from a single, representative slice, retrospectively sorted by interpolated edge position at the image TE of the vrfSSFSE acquisition with a minimum refocusing flip angle of 90°. b) Corresponding images from the vrfSSFSE acquisition with a 60° minimum flip angle.

Figure 4. Intermittent image shading due to cardiac motion for minimum refocusing flip angles of 90° (a) vs. 60° (b), respectively, which tends to be more severe for lower minimum flip angles.



Proc. Intl. Soc. Mag. Reson. Med. 24 (2016)
4257