William Richard Warner1, Marco Palombo1, Flavio Dell'Acqua2, and Ivana Drobnjak1
1CMIC, Computer Science Department, University College London, London, United Kingdom, 2NatBrainLab, King's College London, London, United Kingdom
Synopsis
Temporal Diffusion Ratio (TDR) is a novel technique introduced by Dell’Acqua et al. at ISMRM 2019, with potential for mapping areas with large diameter axons in the human brain. We aim to maximise TDR signal in practical applications by optimizing the sequence parameters used. Working in simulation, it is found that the highest TDR signal for a given axon diameter is produced by contrasting signal from sequences with as disparate as possible shapes: a tall/narrow gradient shape should be contrasted with a short/wide gradient to produce the best contrast.
Introduction
This work aims to identify the optimal sequences maximizing Temporal Diffusion Ratio (TDR) in practical applications. TDR is a
novel contrast proposed at ISMRM 20191 by Dell’Acqua et al to map areas of the brain with large axons.
This could be of high clinical importance since existing axon diameter
techniques such as AxCaliber2 or ActiveAx3 are of limited clinical value, as the signal does not have
sufficient sensitivity for accurate diameter estimations4-6. TDR does not aim to estimate axon diameter accurately, but maps the
areas where diameter is larger than the resolution limit, hence not requiring
such high sensitivity and yet providing a meaningful measure. Here we focus on
maximising the potential of the TDR approach by optimising the pulse sequences used
to generate the contrast. We investigate the effect of all pulse sequence
parameters, finding the optimal combinations that provide maximum sensitivity
and hence the maximum TDR ratio.Methods
TDR contrast is evaluated by contrasting diffusion-MRI
signals collected under two different sets of diffusion parameters as described
in Dell’Acqua1 (Figure[1]). Dell’Acqua’s approach uses multi-directional
HARDI-signals, normalised to corresponding non-diffusion weighted signals and
spherical-averaged. TDR is calculated for each voxel and assumes a distribution
of axons. However, for ease of interpretation we calculate TDR assuming one
gradient direction (perpendicular to the fibre), and voxels with single axon
diameter. Simulations on a two-compartment white matter model (with
non-permeable, parallel infinite cylinders) are used to investigate a space of
clinically plausible PGSE sequence parameters. We use b-values larger than 7000s/mm2
so that the extra-axonal space is fully nulled7,8. We explore sequence
parameters: δ=[0-60ms]; G= [0-300mT/m] and Δ=[10-60ms]. We set diffusion coefficient D=1.7×109m2/s,
axon diameter a=[0-12μm] and T2=70ms to match standard values in the
white matter at 3T. The simulations are done using open source software MISST9-11,
available at ”http://www.nitrc.org/projects/misst''. Results
Experiment 1 shows
(Figure[2]) that the axon diameter sensitivity is not affected by variation in Δ and b-value but is only dependent on the shape
of the gradient waveform, i.e. parameters δ
and G.
Experiment 2 determines which
combination of gradient shapes is optimal for producing a TDR at a fixed b-value (i.e. which combination maximises signal difference, and hence has the highest sensitivity to a single
axonal diameter). Figure[3] shows it is the combination of
the tallest/narrowest and the shortest/longest possible gradient
shapes for a given b-value. This can be seen by the position of the maximum and
minimum signal values which are situated in the bottom-left and the top-right
corners.
Experiment 3 determines
optimal sequence values that maximise the signal difference for Gmax=[80mT/m,
300mT/m] and a range of fixed b-values (only b=8000s/mm2 shown).
TDR curves are shown for various optimal sequence
parameter combinations (Δfix cases minimise effect
of exchange and curvature on TDR). Figure[4a] shows that the best result (i.e.
the highest TDR) is for Δmax=60ms, followed by Δmax=30ms and
Dell’Acqua-ISMRM2019. Δfix cases fare the worst. Figure[4b] shows
similar results for Gmax=80mT/m. Horizontal lines in the figure
indicate where SNR=10 and SNR=20 (calculated for TEmax=120ms). Since
TDR index here is calculated for a single diameter, the crossing of TDR and SNR
curves are just suggestive of sensitivity TDR could at best have to single axon
diameters; in practice a voxel is likely to contain a distribution of diameters
all contributing to the signal. Discussion
Axon diameter sensitivity of
diffusion-MRI signal has previously been shown not to be affected by changes in
Δ,5
a finding confirmed here (Figure[2]). Nevertheless, the choice of Delta is still important in order to achieve the optimal combination of tallest/narrowest and the shortest/longest gradient shapes at a fixed b-value. For an optimal choice of parameters, TDR
resolution limit closely matches the axon diameter resolution limit reported
previously4,5, suggesting that for 300mT/m and a typical SNR of 10,
TDR cannot map the areas with axon diameter below 3μm.
It is possible that a certain
amount of contamination of TDR would occur because of exchange, undulation,
dispersion and curvature of the axons12,13.
Since typical exchange times are around 100ms, this can be mitigated by using Δ
and δ
that are comparatively small, i.e. below 30ms. Hence, TDR in Figure[4a] for Δmax=30ms
could be considered “purer“ axon diameter contrast. Another potential solution is
fixing Δ,
which as seen in Figure[4] provides sensible solutions, however with lower
contrast. Further simulations modelling dispersion and curvature are needed to
evaluate the size of these effects and determine the fully optimal solution. Future work will also include optimisation
for axon diameter distributions and HARDI acquisitions. Conclusions
TDR is a new imaging contrast with
potentially important clinical and neuroscience applications. This work maximises
TDR contrast across clinically plausible diffusion MRI sequence parameters. It
finds that the optimal combination that maximises the distance between the two
signal curves (and hence TDR) is a tallest/narrowest gradient shape versus the lowest/longest
gradient shape combined with any Δ that accommodates that. Δ should
be lower than 30ms or fixed between the two sequences to minimise dispersion
and curvature effect. These optimal solutions can easily be tailored to
different scanners and provide numerical guidelines for the optimal use of TDR.Acknowledgements
This project has received funding from Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC EP/N018702/1, and an EPSRC studentship for William Warner), and has been supported by the NIHR UCLH Biomedical Research Centre.
References
1.
Dell’Acqua,
F., Dallyn, R.,
Chiappiniello, A., Beyh,
A., Tax, C.,
Jones, D.K. and
Catani, M. (2019) Temporal Diffusion
Ratio (TDR): A
Diffusion MRI technique
to map the
fraction and spatial
distribution of large axons in the living human brain. Presented at
ISMRM 2019
2.
Assaf, Y., Blumenfeld-Katzir, T., Yovel, Y. and
Basser, P.J. (2008) AxCaliber: A Method
for Measuring Axon Diameter
Distribution from Diffusion MRI. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 2008;59:1347-1354
3.
Alexander,
D.C., Hubbard, P.L.,
Hall, M.G., Moore,
E.A., Ptito, M.,
Parker, G.J.M. and
Dyrby, T.D. (2010) Orientationally
invariant indices of axon diameter and density from diffusion MRI. NeuroImage
Oct 2010;52(4):1374-1389
4.
Nilsson, M.,
Lasič, S., Drobnjak, I., Topgaard,
D. and Westin, C.F. (2017) Resolution
limit of cylinder diameter estimation by diffusion MRI: The impact of gradient
waveform and orientation dispersion. NMR Biomed. March 2017;30(7):e3711
5.
Drobnjak, I., Zhang, H., Ianus, A., Kaden, E. and
Alexander, D.C. (2016) PGSE, OGSE, and Sensitivity to Axon Diameter in
Diffusion MRI: Insight from a Simulation Study. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine Feb
2016;75(2):688–700
6.
Huang, S.Y., Nummenmaa, A., Witzel, T., Duval,
T., Cohen-Adad, J., Wald, L.L. and McNab, J.A. (2015) The impact of gradient
strength on in vivo diffusion MRI estimates of axon diameter. NeuroImage February
2015;106: 464-472
7.
Veraart, J., Fieremans, E. and Novikov, D.S.
(2019) On the scaling behavior of water diffusion in human brain white matter.
NeuroImage Jan 2019;185:379-387
8.
Kroenke, C.D., Ackerman, J.J. and Yablonskiy, D.A.
(2004) On the nature of the NAA diffusion attenuated MR signal in the central
nervous system. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine Nov 2004;52(5):1052–1059
9.
Drobnjak,
I., Siow, B. and
Alexander, D.C.
(2010) Optimizing gradient waveforms
for microstructure sensitivity in
diffusion-weighted MR. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Sept 2010;206(1):41-515
10.
Drobnjak, I., Zhang, H., Hall, M.G. and
Alexander, D.C. (2011) The matrix formalism for generalised gradients with
time-varying orientation in diffusion NMR. Journal of Magnetic Resonance May
2011;210(1):151-1576
11.
Ianus, A., Siow, B., Drobnjak, I., Zhang, H. and
Alexander, D.C. (2013) Gaussian phase distribution approximations for
oscillating gradient spin echo diffusion MRI. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Feb
2013;227:25-34
12.
Özarslan, E., Yolcu, C., Herberthson, M., Knutsson,
H. and Westin, C.F. (2018) Influence of the Size and Curvedness of Neural
Projections on the Orientationally Averaged Diffusion MR Signal. Frontiers in Physics,
March 2018;https://doi.org/10.3389/fphy.2018.00017
13.
Fieremans, E.,
Novikov, D.S., Jensen, J.H. and Helpern,
J.A. (2010) Monte Carlo study of a two‐compartment exchange model of diffusion.
NMR Biomed. Sept 2010;23(7):711-724