Ki Hwan Kim1,2 and Sung-Hong Park1,2
1Department of Bio and Brain Engineering, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST), Daejeon, Korea, Republic of, 2Graduate School of Medical Science and Engineering, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST), Daejeon, Korea, Republic of
Synopsis
This
study is the first attempt for a learning-based algorithm to be applied to
banding artifact suppression in balanced steady-state free precession (bSSFP). We
trained multilayer perceptron (MLP) models with two or four phase‑cycling
datasets and banding-free datasets as inputs and outputs, respectively. We
demonstrated that MLP was superior to existing methods in terms of banding
artifact suppression and SNR efficiency, which was clearer in two phase‑cycling
datasets. Furthermore, MLP was widely applicable to various image sets,
irrespective of scan parameters, body organs, and field strengths. The
learning-based approach is promising for banding artifact suppression of bSSFP.
Introduction
Balanced steady state free precession (bSSFP) sequence has been
gaining importance in clinical practices due to its high speed, high
signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and minimal distortion. However, bSSFP often
suffers from well-known banding artifacts, which are related to the field
strength and repetition time (TR) (1). Various
methods have been introduced to suppress banding artifacts in bSSFP, but banding artifacts cannot be
suppressed completely by these methods, especially when number of multiple phase
cycling (PC) bSSFP datasets is small (2-4). In
this study, we proposed a learning-based method to combine the bSSFP datasets with
multiple PC for better banding artifact suppression. Models of multilayer
perceptron (MLP), a feedforward artificial neural network (ANN), were trained
to predict banding free bSSFP images based on two and four PC datasets. Then, the
trained MLP models were applied to
another bSSFP datasets for evalulation in terms of performance of banding artifact
suppression.Materials
and Methods
MLP consists of three layers of input, hidden, and output layers. In
training stage, inputs and outputs of the MLP models
were two or four PC datasets and banding-free images, respectively. Banding-free bSSFP images were generated by maximum-intensity
projection (MIP) of 8 or 12 phase-cycled datasets.
In test stage, the learned MLP models received two (0 and 180°) or four (0,
90, 180, and 270°) PC datasets as input and produced
banding-suppressed images as output. The training and test were performed in
two ways. First, Bloch equation simulations were performed to generate 12 PC
datasets. The ground truth was reconstructed by MIP of all PC datasets, among
which two (0 and 180°)
PC datasets were used as the input. The MLP models were trained by the
inputs and the ground truth, and the trained models were evaluated with
simulated ‘bi-tissue’ datasets with T1/T2= 420/50 ms and 1100/70 ms. Two
separate 3D bSSFP datasets with multiple PCs were acquired in humans; axial brain
bSSFP images (dataset #1) in one subject (subject #1) using 8 PCs and coronal
knee bSSFP images
(dataset #2) in another subject (subject #2) with 12 PCs. Using
all PC datasets, the ground truth images and the inputs were produced in the same way as the simulation. To test the trained MLP models, axial
brain images (dataset #3), sagittal knee images (dataset #4), and axial knee
images (dataset #5) were acquired. The MLP models were trained by two or four
PC datasets as input and were additionally evaluated in human experiments. Image
parameters of all the scans were shown in Table 1. The mean square error (MSE)
index was used to measure the difference between the ground truth images and
the outputs of MLP, MIP, and sum-of-square (SOS), and SNR
was also calculated. All experiments were performed with a 3T whole-body
scanner (Siemens Medical Solutions, Erlangen, Germany). Image analysis was performed
using MATLAB(The Mathworks, Natick, MA). Results
The simulation showed that MLP was superior to the existing
methods (MIP and SOS) for banding artifacts suppression (Figure 1): The images combined with MIP and SOS
demonstrated visible signal fluctuations, which were mostly eliminated in the
results of MLP. MSE values of MLP (1.5X10-5) were much smaller than those of the existing methods (MIP: 5.6x10-5, SOS: 6.7x10-4). The results of human
experiments were consistent with those of simulations. MLP showed lower MSE
values than those of MIP in both training datasets and test datasets (Table 2),
except for the four PC images of dataset #3. The bSSFP images at different PC
angles showed banding artifacts at different spatial locations (Figure 2a).
Visually both MIP and MLP suppressed banding artifacts well (Figure 2b-e),
however, the differences between the ground truth images and MIP/MLP images were
clearly visualized in the subtraction images (Figure 2g-j). MLP showed smaller
difference than that of MIP. MLP showed higher SNR efficiency than MIP in all
tissues (Table 3).Discussion and Conclusion
To our knowledge, it is the first time for a
learning-based algorithm to be applied to reducing banding artifacts in bSSFP.
Combination of multiple PC datasets with MLP successfully suppressed banding
artifacts in bSSFP MRI, while maintaining high SNR. The MLP models trained with
a couple of 3D multiple PC datasets from two different organs in human worked
well on datasets acquired with different scan parameters from different
subjects, and also those acquired from a different species at different field
strength. MLP worked well even with two PC datasets, providing better banding
artifact suppression and higher SNR efficiency than the widely-used MIP.
Artificial neural network is a promising approach to combining multiple phase
cycled bSSFP datasets for banding artifact suppression.Acknowledgements
No acknowledgement found.References
1. Park SH, Han PK, Choi SH. Physiological and Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Using Balanced Steady-state Free Precession. Korean journal of radiology 2015;16(3):550-559.
2. Haacke EM, Wielopolski PA, Tkach JA, Modic MT. Steady-state free precession imaging in the presence of motion: application for improved visualization of the cerebrospinal fluid. Radiology 1990;175(2):545-552.
3. Vasanawala SS, Pauly JM, Nishimura DG. Linear combination steady-state free precession MRI. Magnetic resonance in medicine 2000;43(1):82-90.
4. Bangerter NK, Hargreaves BA, Vasanawala SS, Pauly JM, Gold GE, Nishimura DG. Analysis of multiple-acquisition SSFP. Magnetic resonance in medicine 2004;51(5):1038-1047.