Benedikt Rieger1, Mehmet Akçakaya2,3, Lothar R. Schad1, and Sebastian Weingärtner2,4
1Computer Assisted Clinical Medicine, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany, 2Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States, 3Center for Magnetic Resonance Research, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States, 4Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
Synopsis
In this study we propose to integrate diffusion
imaging into magnetic resonance fingerprinting, a method that has shown promise
for time-efficient simultaneous quantification of multiple tissue parameters.
The proposed sequence for quantitative T1, T2 and the apparent diffusion
coefficient (ADC) is based on using Cartesian EPI readout. The contrast is
generated using spin-echo EPI and gradient spoiling with diffusion gradients of
varying moment and varying TR and TE. Joint T1, T2 and ADC parameter-maps
acquired in phantoms are in good agreement with reference measurements and
demonstrate high quality in-vivo maps, within a scan time of 28 seconds per
slice.
Introduction
The apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) is a standard
imaging tool in clinical neurology, with particular importance for acute stroke
and neurological disorders1. Magnetic resonance fingerprinting (MRF) has been introduced as a
promising method for fast simultaneous quantification of multiple tissue
parameters such as T1, T2 and T2* 2,3. First implementations have shown the possibility of integrating
diffusion with MRF, though with prolonged measurement times4. In this study, we present a rapid sequence for acquiring T1, T2 and
ADC maps with a volumetric MRF sequence based on spoiled echo planar imaging
(EPI) readout, with spin-echo refocusing.Methods
The proposed MRF sequence (Diff-MRF) is based on the
slice-interleaved acquisition of a series of EPI images (Figure 1a). A total of
53 measurements are acquired, each consisting of three EPI-Diffusion readouts
per slice with three different b-values (0/500/1000s/mm2). Global
inversion pulses are applied every third measurement with varying time onset of
relative to the slice-acquisition to increase T1 sensitivity of the sequence.
Each EPI-Diffusion readout (Figure 1b) consists of a fat suppression with
gradient spoiling, an excitation pulse, two refocusing pulses with bipolar
diffusion gradients in readout direction followed by the EPI readout train. TE
is varied throughout the measurement to foster T2 variation (Figure 1c), TR is
minimized to shorten overall measurement time.
The MRF dictionary was generated by simulating the
evolution of the magnetization based on Bloch-equation simulations for a
variety of T1, T2 and ADC values. Dictionary matching was performed by
minimizing the inner product between the magnitude of the measured signal and
the dictionary entries. To correct for flip angle errors and improve accuracy
of the T1 and T2 maps, B1+ maps were acquired prior to the Diff-MRF measurement
with the double angle method and integrated into the dictionary simulation.
The proposed method was tested in phantom and in-vivo
scans on a 3T scanner (Siemens Prisma) with a 64-channel head coil, with the
following image parameters: interleaved-slices=10, TE/TR=62-262ms/1500-3370ms,
flip angle=30°, voxel-size=1.9x1.9x5mm3, BW=1562Hz/pixel, partial-Fourier=5/8,
parallel imaging factor=5 with GRAPPA reconstruction, reference lines=30,
frames=159 per slice, total acquisition time=4:42min. The quantification
accuracy of the Diff-MRF was validated in phantom experiments compared with an
IR-TSE (TR=10s,TI=23-7440ms) for T1, a SE (TR=10s,TE=12-993ms) sequence for T2
and bipolar diffusion EPI sequence (b-values=0/500/1000s/mm2 in
readout direction, 5 averages) for ADC maps. All reference measurement had the
same voxel size and number of slices as the Diff-MRF. The phantom consisted of
compartments doped with varying concentration of gadoterate-meglumine (Dotarem;
Guerbet), sucrose and cupric sulfate. Results
The Diff-MRF method yields homogeneous T
1, T
2 and ADC
estimates within the phantoms (Figure 2) and quantitatively shows good
agreement with the reference measurements (deviation: T1/T2/ADC:
-6±8%/-8±6%/6±7%). Figure 3 shows exemplary fingerprints of three different
tissues of a healthy subject volunteer with distinctly different signal paths.
The baseline images depict the varying contrast through the measurement induced
by the diffusion gradients, TE variations and the timing of the inversion
pulses. Figure 4 shows maps of the 10 slices of the Diff-MRF and the reference
diffusion in-vivo measurements. T
1 and T
2 maps show no visual artifacts, and
offer high image quality. ADC maps of the Diff-MRF are visually comparable to
the reference measurements, while quantitatively slightly overestimating (Diff-MRF
/ referemce: gray matter 2637/2263mm
2/s, white matter 856/757mm
2/s, CSF
1842/1368mm
2/s ).
Discussion
The proposed method for
simultaneous T
1, T
2 and ADC quantification demonstrates high accuracy compared
to reference measurements. Artifact-free parameter maps were acquired in-vivo
within 4:42 minutes for 10 slices, resulting in an affective scan time of 28
second per slice. Using an EPI-based MRF design for the generation of ADC maps
promotes comparability of these in clinical routine, as clinical diffusion
imaging sequences are nearly exclusively based on EPI readout.
Very high ADC and low T
1
values are slightly over- and underestimated, respectively. This might be
caused by an increased noise-floor due to the non-zero mean noise in the MRI
magnitude images, inducing a bias when using inner-product minimization. This may
be mitigated by integrating Rician noise characteristics in the matching
procedure and will be the subject of future research.
Conclusion
In this study we have shown the feasibility of
combining diffusion imaging with MRF based on EPI readout. Simultaneous T1, T2
and ADC maps were acquired in phantoms and in-vivo within an effective scan
time of 28 seconds per slice. Acknowledgements
No acknowledgement found.References
1. Bihan DL, Iima M. Diffusion
Magnetic Resonance Imaging: What Water Tells Us about Biological Tissues. PLOS Biol. 2015;13:e1002203. doi:
10.1371/journal.pbio.1002203.
2. Ma D, Gulani
V, Seiberlich N, Liu K, Sunshine JL, Duerk JL, Griswold MA. Magnetic
resonance fingerprinting. Nature 2013;495:187–192. doi: 10.1038/nature11971.
3. Rieger B, Zimmer F, Zapp J, Weingärtner S, Schad LR. Magnetic
resonance fingerprinting using echo-planar imaging: Joint quantification of T1
and T2∗ relaxation times. Magn. Reson. Med. 2016:n/a-n/a.
doi: 10.1002/mrm.26561.
4. Jiang Y, Hamilton JI, Lo W-C, Wright KL, Ma D, Coristine AJ,
Seiberlich N, Gulani V, Griswold MA. Simultaneous T1, T2 and Diffusion
Quantification using Multiple Contrast Prepared Magnetic Resonance
Fingerprinting. In: Proceeding
25th Annu Meet ISMRM. Hawaii, USA; p. 1171.