Kelly Jarvis1,2, Susanne Schnell1, Alex J. Barker1, Shivraman Giri3, Nivedita Naresh1, James C. Carr1, Jeremy D. Collins1, and Michael Markl1,2
1Department of Radiology, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, United States, 2Department of Biomedical Engineering, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, United States, 3Siemens Healthcare, Chicago, IL, United States
Synopsis
Improvements in the 3D PC-MRA calculated from 4D flow MRI are needed for
better vessel wall depiction and assessment of vascular dimensions. Balanced
steady state free precession (bSSFP) is a promising imaging method to combine
with 4D flow for an improved depiction of cardiac anatomy and blood-tissue
contrast. This study of 10 healthy subjects compares multiple PC-MRA algorithms
using bSSFP with 4D flow magnitude and flow images.
PURPOSE
For 4D flow MRI vessel boundaries can be depicted by a 3D phase contrast
MR angiogram (PC-MRA), calculated from 4D flow magnitude and flow images.
However, this approach is limited by the low blood-tissue contrast of 4D flow magnitude
images. Balance steady state free precession (bSSFP) has inherently improved
blood-tissue contrast for depicting cardiac anatomy1,2. We have
developed a fast k-t accelerated 3D
CINE bSSFP imaging protocol for use with 4D flow MRI. The purpose of this study
was to use bSSFP with 4D flow MRI for an improved 3D PC-MRA calculation without
significantly increasing scan time.METHODS
Non-contrast free-breathing k-t
GRAPPA accelerated 3D CINE bSSFP MRI and 4D flow MRI were acquired using
prototype sequences in 10 healthy subjects (aorta; age=44±18[21-68] years) at
1.5T (MAGNETOM Area, Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany) with the same
spatial resolution (2.3-2.5 x 2.3-2.5 x 2.4 mm3) and volumetric
coverage (FOV = 360-400 x 270-300 mm2, slab thickness = 72 mm)
(Figure 1); the study was
approved by institutional review board and all subjects gave informed consent.
Three averages were acquired for 3D CINE bSSFP to mitigate breathing effects
(outer mode averaging, TE = 1.6 ms, TR = 3.2 ms, temporal resolution = 38.4 ms,
flip angle = 47-90 deg, R = 5, average scan time = 2.6 min) and interpolated
along the temporal domain for integration with 4D flow (TE = 2.4-2.5 ms, TR =
4.8-4.9 ms, temporal resolution = 38.4-39.2 ms, flip angle = 7˚, GRAPPA
acceleration with R = 2, venc=1.5 m/s). 3D PC-MRA was calculated using multiple
algorithms with 4D flow and bSSFP data (Table 1). The standard deviation of the
4D flow velocity magnitude over time was used to suppress the high signal fat
voxels in bSSFP. Contrast ratios were determined for ROIs in the aorta, septum,
fat, liver and lungs. The algorithms that included bSSFP were compared to
similar algorithms using 4D flow only (e.g. PC-MRA 3 was compared to
1 and 2).RESULTS
Scan
times were average [range] = 4D flow: 11.2 [6.9-14.5], bSSFP: 2.6 [1.8-3.1]
minutes. An example of images from one subject (Figure 2) and contrast ratios for
all subjects (Figure 3) are shown. The contrast between the vessels and the septum,
liver and lungs showed improvements when using bSSFP (PC-MRAs 3, 6, 9 and 12). The
contrast between the aorta and the fat decreased when using bSSFP but could be improved
using histogram equalization of the magnitude and bSSFP data prior to 3D PC-MRA
calculation.DISCUSSION
These
preliminary results indicate the potential for combining bSSFP and 4D flow MRI
for improved 3D PC-MRA quality while adding only minimal scan time (2-3
minutes). Current limitations include incomplete removal of high intensity bSSFP
fat signal and additional algorithms need to be explored for improved fat suppression
in order to increase vessel-tissue and vessel-background contrast. In addition,
the presented algorithms need to be studied in larger cohorts including
patients with common aortic diseases.CONCLUSION
k-t GRAPPA accelerated
3D CINE bSSFP together with 4D flow MRI shows potential to improve the
calculation of 3D PC-MRA. Future work will focus on the combination of these
data for the best PC-MRA image quality for use in vessel segmentation.Acknowledgements
Grant support by NIH R01 HL115828 and K25 HL119608References
1. Scheffler K, Lehnhardt S. Eur
Radiol. 2003;13(11):2409-2418.
2.
Markl M, Leupold J. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2012;35(6):1274-1289.