In this work we present and demonstrate a novel technique to generate multi-spoke RF excitation with arbitrary zeroth and first gradient moments, allowing for clean flow imaging without errors. The RF pulses are demonstrated in flow phantoms and in-vivo at 7 Tesla, paving the road for 4D flow imaging using pTX spoke excitation.
[1] Saekho, S., Yip, C.-y., Noll, D. C., Boada, F. E. and Stenger, V. A. (2006), Fast-kz three-dimensional tailored radiofrequency pulse for reduced B1 inhomogeneity. Magn Reson Med, 55: 719–724. doi: 10.1002/mrm.20840
[2] Setsompop, K., Alagappan, V., Gagoski, B., Witzel, T., Polimeni, J., Potthast, A., Hebrank, F., Fontius, U., Schmitt, F., Wald, L. L. and Adalsteinsson, E. (2008), Slice-selective RF pulses for in vivo Bmath image inhomogeneity mitigation at 7 tesla using parallel RF excitation with a 16-element coil. Magn. Reson. Med., 60: 1422–1432. doi:10.1002/mrm.21739
[3] Schmitter, S., DelaBarre, L., Wu, X., Greiser, A., Wang, D., Auerbach, E. J., Vaughan, J. T., Ugurbil, K. and Van de Moortele, P.-F. (2013), Cardiac imaging at 7 tesla: Single- and two-spoke radiofrequency pulse design with 16-channel parallel excitation. Magn. Reson. Med., 70: 1210–1219. doi:10.1002/mrm.24935
[4] Schmidt, S., Flassbeck, S., Breithaupt, M., Ladd, M. E., Schmitter, S. (2016), On the Performance of Multi-Spoke RF Pulses in the Presence of Laminar Flow - a Simulation Study. Magn. Reson. Mat. Phys. Biol. Med., 29(1 Supplement), 2016. ESMRMB 2016, 33rd Annual Scientific Meeting, Vienna, AT, September 29 - October 1, contribution no. 381.
[5] Pauly, J., Nishimura, D., Macovski, A. (1989). A k-space analysis of small-tip-angle excitation. J. Magn.
Reson. (1969), 81(1), 43-56.
Figure 1:
a) RF and gradient waveforms of a single-pulse excitation and corresponding $$$m_0$$$ and $$$m_1$$$ without flow compensation. The variation of $$$m_1$$$ over the acquisition k-space (red area) leads to velocity dependent spatial shifts as shown in the phantom measurement.
b) By applying bipolar gradients, adapted for each line, constancy of the first gradient moment over the acquisition k-space (green area) can be achieved and thereby correct slice profiles can be acquired.
Figure 2:
a) RF and gradient waveforms of a 2-spoke excitation and corresponding $$$m_0$$$/$$$m_1$$$ without flow compensation. For both pulses $$$m_1$$$ varies over the acquisition k-space (red area) leading to spatial shifts of the magnetization excited by both pulses.
b) With conventional compensation $$$m_1$$$ of the second pulse (green area) but not of the first pulse (red area) can be kept constant. Therefore, the magnetization excited by the first pulse will still appear shifted in the image.
c) Applying correct flow compensation to a 2-spoke excitation results in constant $$$m_1$$$ for both pulses over the entire acquisition k-space (green areas).
Figure 3:
Cross-section through a measured slice in a static region (blue) and in two pipes within a flow phantom containing flowing water (red & yellow). Without flow compensation (top), slice center shifts of -2.83±0.05 mm and 1.65±0.05mm are observed. Applying conventional flow compensation to the monopolar 2-spoke excitation (middle) results in slice center shifts of-1.29±0.05 mm and 0.84±0.05mm. Applying flow compensation optimized for the monopolar 2-spoke excitation (bottom), these shifts are reduced to -0.17±0.05mm and 0.12±0.05mm.
Figure 4:
In-vivo images of the femoral artery of a healthy volunteer acquired with a monopolar 2-spoke excitation without and with correct flow compensation. The flow-related slice profile degradation, present in the images without flow compensation, is suppressed in the correctly compensated images.
Figure 5:
a) In-vivo velocity maps (axial slice, through-plane velocity encoded) of the femoral artery of a healthy volunteer acquired with a vendor-provided sequence (left) and with a monopolar 2-spoke excitation (middle). The velocity maps are noise masked based on an amplitude image (right). The red arrow indicates the femoral artery in the amplitude image.
b) Cross section through the velocity profile of the femoral artery. Difference in peak velocity is 3.0%, and mean velocity deviation within the artery is 4.7cm/s.