Fabio Nery1, Enrico De Vita2,3, Chris A. Clark1, Isky Gordon1, and David L. Thomas3
1UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, Developmental Imaging and Biophysics Section, London, United Kingdom, 2National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, Lysholm Department of Neuroradiology;, 3UCL Institute of Neurology, Department of Brain Repair and Rehabilitation
Synopsis
Arterial spin labelling
(ASL) is a unique MR approach for quantifying tissue perfusion non-invasively. However,
it is prone to motion-related artefacts which limit its application in the
clinical domain, especially outside the brain. In this work, we combine a
motion-insensitive ASL acquisition scheme with a specifically tailored retrospective
motion correction pipeline. This enabled repeatable renal perfusion
measurements to be obtained in the first ASL study in paediatric patients with moderate/severe
chronic kidney disease.
Introduction
Arterial
spin labelling (ASL) is a unique MR approach for quantifying tissue perfusion
non-invasively. More than two decades of developments enabled great strides in
translating this technique from specialized research labs into clinical
implementation [1,2]. Nevertheless, ever since its inception ASL has been
hindered by its propensity to motion-related artefacts which limit its
application in the clinical domain, especially outside the brain [3,4]. In this
work, we combine a motion-insensitive ASL acquisition scheme with a
specifically tailored image processing pipeline to enable accurate and
repeatable renal perfusion measurements to be obtained in paediatric patients
with kidney disease.Purpose
To
evaluate the effect of retrospective motion correction approaches in ASL for
renal perfusion assessment in paediatric patients with moderate/severe chronic kidney
disease (CKD stages 3-4).Methods
Eleven
children with chronic kidney disease (CKD) (age 12±3) were scanned twice on a
1.5T Avanto scanner (Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen). The time between scans was 23±10
days. Coronal-oblique ASL data volumes were obtained using a single-shot FAIR Q2TIPS
3D-GRASE acquisition scheme with respiratory triggering and background
suppression (BS). Main scan parameters include: 25 ASL pairs; inflow time (TI)
1200ms; TR/TE 3000ms/31.54ms; nominal scan time 150 seconds; matrix size
64x64x10; voxel size 4.5x4.5x6.0mm; Partial Fourier (factor 3/4) along the
second PE direction. The ASL scan was repeated 2 times in each session
with a ~30min gap between acquisitions, to assess intra-session
reproducibility. A separate saturation recovery (SR) scan was performed to
obtain T1/M0 maps for ASL quantification. Scan parameters were identical except
BS was disabled and 9 post-saturation delays (TD) were used (range: 100-2500ms;
increment 300ms; saturation pulse spatially non-selective). A proton-density
(PD) volume was also obtained with similar scanning parameters (without
saturation pulse) to serve as reference for image registration and functional
renal parenchyma ROI drawing during data analysis. Care was taken not to
include high intensity regions (corresponding to a dilated collecting system)
in the ROIs. Three post-processing approaches were used: A) no registration; B)
image-registration only and C) image-registration + weighted averaging scheme
based on [5] (Fig.1). 3D rigid body registrations were performed using elastix
[6] with masks for independent registration of both kidneys and a mutual
information-based image similarity measure. Each image volume in the SR
recovery time series was also registered to the same reference PD image for
ensuring alignment between the T1/M0 maps and the perfusion-weighted datasets
(not shown in Fig.1). ASL quantification was performed using a
single-compartment model [7]. Repeatability of renal blood flow (RBF) estimates
was evaluated as assessed by the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and
the within-subject coefficient of variation (WSCV). The effect of registering
the individual control/tag images (before averaging) was evaluated by computing
the temporal standard deviation (tStdev)
of the ASL difference signal in the ROIs, as motion is the major source of variability in the perfusion-weighted signal across ASL pairs (assuming no
significant change in physiology during the scan).Results and Discussion
Examples of PD, PWIs, as well as tStdev decrease and RBF maps of in 3 slices of 3 patients
are shown in Fig.2. Descriptive statistics and repeatability measures regarding
the RBF estimates obtained using the different processing pipelines are
summarised in Fig.3. Image registration was particularly successful in
improving the inter-session repeatability of the measurements. The
intra-session repeatability without applying image registration was unexpectedly
high. Because the SR dataset was acquired only once at the beginning of the
scanning session, systematic errors due to consistent misalignment between the
SR and the ASL dataset in both ASL runs resulted in a repeatable mean RBF
despite severe corruption in the RBF maps in the no-registration case. Ensuring
alignment of the SR and ASL datasets was found to be the most challenging step
in the pipeline because of their dissimilar contrast (due to the use of BS in
the ASL scans), in particular in patients 4 and 5 (Fig. 4). We therefore would
recommend acquiring a SR dataset (~1min using our acquisition protocol)
immediately before/after the ASL acquisition, to minimise the likelihood of
significant motion between acquisitions, particularly in challenging patient
populations such as the one in this study. Registration of the BS control/tag
time series (unaveraged data) was feasible, despite reduced tissue contrast, as
seen by significant decrease in the tStdev of the ASL difference signal in the
ROIs (decrease of 15.7±11.2% (two-tailed paired t-test, p<0.001),
range=0.4-37.8%).Conclusion
We
have combined a robust ASL acquisition technique (single-shot 3D readout with
multiple averages), with a dedicated image registration pipeline and obtained
reproducible RBF estimates in the first study applying ASL to a paediatric
cohort of patients with CKD.Acknowledgements
The
authors would like to thank Kidney Research UK (www.kidneyresearchuk.org) for funding
this work. Part
of this work was supported by the National Institute for Health Research
University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre. DLT is supported by the UCL Leonard Wolfson
Experimental Neurology Centre (PR/ylr/18575).References
[1]
Alsop, D., Arterial spin labeling: its time is now, MAGMA, 25, 75-77, 2012 [2] Alsop, D., et. al., Recommended
implementation of arterial spin-labeled perfusion MRI for clinical
applications: A consensus of the ISMRM perfusion study group and the European
consortium for ASL in dementia, MRM, 73, 102-116, 2014 [3] Robson, P., et. al., Strategies for reducing respiratory motion
artifacts in renal perfusion imaging with arterial spin labeling, MRM, 61,
1374-1387, 2009 [4] Gardener, A.,
et. al., Multislice perfusion of the kidneys using parallel imaging: Image
acquisition and analysis strategies, MRM, 63,1627-1636, 2010 [5] Tanenbaum, A., et. al., A method for
reducing the effects of motion contamination in arterial spin labeling magnetic
resonance imaging, JCBFM, 35, 1697-1702, 2015 [6] Klein, S., et. al., A Toolbox for Intensity-Based Medical Image
Registration, IEEE TMI, 29, 196-205, 2010 [7]
Song, R. et. al., Improved renal perfusion measurement with a dual
navigator-gated Q2TIPS fair technique, MRM, 64, 1352-1359, 2010;