Beata Bachrata1,2,3, Bernhard Strasser1,2,4, Wolfgang Bogner1,2, Albrecht Ingo Schmid1,5, Siegfried Trattnig1,2,3, and Simon Daniel Robinson1,2,6,7
1High Field MR Centre, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria, 2Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria, 3Christian Doppler Laboratory for Clinical Molecular MR Imaging, Vienna, Austria, 4Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States, 5Center for Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria, 6Centre for Advanced Imaging, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia, 7Department of Neurology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
Synopsis
The accuracy of Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping in fatty regions is adversely
affected by the chemical shift effects and by the relaxation rate differences
between fat and water. We propose using a recently developed water-fat
separation technique based on multi-band principles, Simultaneous Multiple Resonance Frequency (SMURF)
imaging, to correct for these
effects. SMURF achieves clean water-fat separation in the head-and-neck,
allowing the generation of recombined water-fat images fully corrected for chemical
shift and relaxation effects. This makes bias-free Quantitative
Susceptibility Mapping possible in
body regions containing significant amounts of fat, with the free selection of echo-times,
receiver bandwidths and flip angles.
Introduction
The high sensitivity of Quantitative Susceptibility
Mapping (QSM) to calcifications, haemorrhages, iron depositions, tissue
microstructure and tissue oxygenation has lead it being increasingly applied to
regions outside the brain, such as head-and-neck1, liver2, breasts3, knee4 and prostate5. The presence of fat in these regions, with a Larmor
frequency shift of circa 3.5 ppm6 relative to water, results in errors in field estimates
and thereby in estimated susceptibilities. These errors originate from three separate effects.
Firstly, the fat image is shifted relative to water along the frequency-encoding
direction by $$N_{voxels}=\frac{{\Delta}f}{rBW/pixel},$$ where rBW is the receiver bandwidth and Δf the chemical shift difference. This so-called Type 1 chemical shift (displacement)
artefact leads to overlap between water and fat signals, as well as signal
voids, making spatial phase-unwrapping problematic. To reduce these shifts,
high receiver bandwidths are usually used, despite their detrimental effects on
image SNR. Secondly, the different precession frequency of fat gives rise to
echo-time dependent phase component (φ), defined as $$\phi={\Delta}f\gamma_wB_0TE,$$ which doesn’t reflect the
tissue susceptibility and also causes destructive interference between water
and fat signals. To reduce the errors resulting from this Type 2 chemical shift
(phase discrepancy) artefact, acquisition at in-phase echo-times is commonly
used1,3, although this restricts the
choices of TEs. Lastly, differences in relaxation times lead the acquired water
and fat signals to be weighted differently, according to the signal equation: $$S=\frac{PD(1-e^{-TR/T_1})e^{-TE/T_2^*\sin\alpha}}{1-e^{-TR/T_1}\cos\alpha},$$
with PD being the proton density and α the flip
angle. Since the T2* constants of fat and
water in homogeneous mixtures are expected to be similar7, T2* effects can be neglected.
The T1 relaxation differences, however, bias the field estimation in
mixed water-fat voxels. To minimize this bias, small flip angles have to be
used, resulting in poor SNR.
Recently, a single-echo water-fat separation technique based
on multi-band principles has been proposed and applied to correct the chemical
shift displacement artefact in conventional (magnitude-based) MR imaging8. Here, we propose to use this technique, to which we
refer as Simultaneous Multiple Resonance Frequency (SMURF) imaging6, to
correct for the effects of chemical shift and relaxation differences of fat in
QSM. In the SMURF method, multi-band pulses9 simultaneously but separately excite fat and water and
CAIPIRINHA10,11 with parallel imaging reconstruction12,13 separate the corresponding signals. The fat signal
is corrected for chemical shift displacement, for phase discrepancy relative to
water and for T1 relaxation difference and recombined with the water
signal. This generates water-fat images free of chemical shift and T1
relaxation effects, allowing bias-free Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping in
regions containing significant amounts of fat, and unrestricted choices of
echo-times, receiver bandwidths and flip angles. Methods
Coronal head-and-neck
images of a healthy volunteer were acquired using 3T Siemens PRISMA scanner and
64-channel head-and-neck coil. 3D GRE SMURF images were acquired with: TE=12.2ms,
TR=26ms, FA=15°, FOV=240x240mm, 240 slices, resolution=1.1x1.1x1.1mm, rBW/pixel=150Hz,
phase-encoding direction right-left and with parallel imaging acceleration of R=3 and
PF=6/8 resulting in TA=5min39s. A low resolution dual‑echo GRE scan was also
acquired for coil combination14 and the first echo image was used for water-fat
unaliasing with slice-GRAPPA11. The unaliased fat signal was shifted by 2.93 voxels
(applied in k-space) to reverse the chemical shift displacement, corrected for the
0.74π phase discrepancy relative to water and corrected for the T1
relaxation-rate-related increased signal weighting relative to water by a
factor of 1.87. Susceptibility maps were calculated from the
recombined SMURF water-fat images using Laplacian unwrapping15, background-field removal with PDF16 and susceptibility
calculation by STAR17 using the Sepia toolbox18. The
susceptibility
maps estimated from the water-fat images recombined without and with
application of individual correction steps were compared.Results
The SMURF method generated cleanly separated fat and water images of the head-and-neck
(Figure 2), allowing the elimination of chemical shift and T1
relaxation effects (Figure 3). The susceptibility maps which were corrected for
both Type 1 and Type 2 chemical shift artefact (Figure 4, centre left and left)
showed high correspondence between the strongly paramagnetic areas and the
locations of fatty fasciae in the neck (Figure 2). Without Type 1 chemical
shift correction (Figure 4, centre left), the susceptibility maps in and around
fatty fasciae were more blurred, leading to differences in susceptibility
values of up to 0.3 ppm in some areas, i.e. 100% (Figure 5, left). If no Type 2
chemical shift correction was applied, the susceptibility values in fatty
fasciae were erroneously estimated as being negative (Figure 4, left). The
correction of the T1 relaxation effects (Figure 4, right) had the smallest
effect of all corrections (Figure 5, right), as not many mixed water-fat voxels were
present.Discussion and Conclusion
The accuracy of Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping in fatty region is
adversely affected by chemical shift artefacts of Type 1 (displacement) and
Type 2 (phase discrepancy) and by the T1 relaxation differences
between water and fat. We have shown that a new water-separation
technique, Simultaneous Multiple Resonance Frequency (SMURF) imaging6, allows all of these effects to be corrected, making chemical
shift and T1 relaxation effects bias-free Quantitative
Susceptibility Mapping viable. The SMURF is expected to increase the accuracy of QSM in body regions
containing significant amounts of fatty tissue, such as head-and-neck, liver
and breasts.Acknowledgements
This study was funded by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) project 31452. SR was additionally supported by the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Action MS-fMRI-QSM 794298. The financial support by the Austrian Federal Ministry for Digital and Economic Affairs and the National Foundation for Research, Technology and Development is gratefully acknowledged.References
-
Karsa A. Optimising MRI
Magnetic Susceptibility Mapping for Applications in Challenging Regions of the
Body. 2018.
- Sharma SD, Fischer R, Schoennagel
BP, et al. MRI-based quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) and R2* mapping
of liver iron overload: Comparison with SQUID-based biomagnetic liver
susceptometry: QSM and R2*: Comparison With SQUID. Magn Reson Med. 2017;78(1):264-270. doi:10.1002/mrm.26358
- Schweser
F, Herrmann K-H, Deistung A, et al. Quantitative
magnetic susceptibility mapping ( QSM ) in breast disease reveals additional
information for MR-based characterization of carcinoma and calcification. In: Proceedings
of the 19th Annual Meeting of ISMRM. Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 2011. p.
1014.
- Wei
H, Dibb R, Decker K, et al. Investigating magnetic
susceptibility of human knee joint at 7 tesla. Magn Reson Med. 2017.
- Straub S, Laun FB, Emmerich J, et
al. Potential of quantitative susceptibility mapping for detection of prostatic
calcifications. J Magn Reson Imaging JMRI. 2017;45(3):889-898.
doi:10.1002/jmri.25385
- Ren J, Dimitrov I, Sherry AD,
Malloy CR. Composition of adipose tissue and marrow fat in humans by 1H NMR at
7 Tesla. J Lipid Res. 2008;49(9):2055-2062.
doi:10.1194/jlr.D800010-JLR200
- Yu H, McKenzie CA, Shimakawa A, et
al. Multiecho reconstruction for simultaneous water-fat decomposition and T2*
estimation. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2007;26(4):1153-1161.
doi:10.1002/jmri.21090
- Bachrata B, Strasser B, Schmid AI,
Bogner W, Trattnig S, Robinson SD. Eliminating chemical shift artefact using
simultaneous, separate water and fat excitation combined with CAIPIRINHA. In: Proceedings
of the 27th Annual Meeting of ISMRM. Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 2019. p.
4005.
- Müller S. Multifrequency selective
rf pulses for multislice MR imaging. Magn Reson Med. 1988;6(3):364-371.
- Breuer
FA, Blaimer M, Heidemann RM, Mueller MF, Griswold MA, Jakob PM. Controlled
aliasing in parallel imaging results in higher acceleration (CAIPIRINHA) for
multi-slice imaging. Magn Reson Med. 2005;53(3):684-691.
doi:10.1002/mrm.20401
- Setsompop K, Gagoski BA, Polimeni
JR, Witzel T, Wedeen VJ, Wald LL. Blipped-Controlled Aliasing in Parallel
Imaging (blipped-CAIPI) for simultaneous multi-slice EPI with reduced g-factor
penalty. Magn Reson Med. 2012;67(5):1210-1224. doi:10.1002/mrm.23097
- Pruessmann K, Weiger M, Scheidegger
M, Boesiger P. SENSE: sensitivity encoding for fast MRI. Magn Reson Med.
1999;42(5):952-962.
- Griswold
MA, Jakob PM, Heidemann RM, et al. Generalized
autocalibrating partially parallel acquisitions (GRAPPA). Magn Reson Med. 2002;47(6):1202-1210.
- Eckstein
K, Dymerska B, Bachrata B, et al. Computationally
Efficient Combination of Multi-channel Phase Data From Multi-echo Acquisitions
(ASPIRE): Combination of Multi-Channel Phase Data from Multi-Echo Acquisitions
(ASPIRE). Magn Reson Med. 2018;79(6):2996-3006. doi:10.1002/mrm.26963
- Schofield MA, Zhu Y. Fast phase
unwrapping algorithm for interferometric applications. Opt Lett. 2003;28(14):1194-1196.
- Liu
T, Khalidov I, de Rochefort L, et al. A novel
background field removal method for MRI using projection onto dipole fields
(PDF). NMR Biomed. 2011;24(9):1129-1136. doi:10.1002/nbm.1670
- Li W, Wang N, Yu F, et al. A method
for estimating and removing streaking artifacts in quantitative susceptibility
mapping. NeuroImage. 2015;108:111-122.
doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.12.043
- Chan K-S, Marques J. SEPIA -
SuscEptibility mapping PIpeline tool for phAse images. In: Proceedings of
the 27th Annual Meeting of ISMRM. Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 2019. p. 4827.