Uten Yarach1,2, Frank Godenschweger3, Matt A Bernstein2, Myung-Ho In2, Itthi Chatnuntawech44, Kawin Setsompop5, Oliver Speck3, and Joshua Trzasko2
1Radiologic Technology Department, Associated Medical Sciences, Chiang Mai University, Chinag Mai, Thailand, 2Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA, Rochester, MN, United States, 3Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Biomedical Magnetic Resonance, Magdeburg, Germany, 4National Nanotechnology Center (NANOTEC), National Science and Technology Development Agency (NSTDA), Bangkok, Thailand, 5Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States
Synopsis
Short-Axis
Propeller (SAP) EPI enables short echo spacing, thereby minimizing geometric
distortion, while providing low resolution in the readout direction of single
blades. These multiple low-resolution
blades can be combined to create a final high-resolution image. However, off-resonance
effect often results in blurring after blade combination. In
this work, we extend a model-based framework for reconstructing SAP-EPI to minimize off-resonance induced blurring artifacts.
Moreover, locally low rank (LLR) regularization is incorporated to estimate
per-blade phase calibrations. As a result, the proposed technique enables high-resolution SAP-EPI
images with minimizing blurring artifact and no need for phase calibration of
different multi-blade directions.
INTRODUCTION
Short-Axis-Propeller (SAP) EPI enables short echo-spacing (ESP), thereby minimizing geometric distortion, while providing low resolution
in the readout direction of single blades. Typically, multiple low-resolution blades
can be combined to create a final high-resolution EPI image1-3. However, phase variations among blades and
also off-resonance effects that result in blurring remain especially at high
field (e.g., 7T). In this work, we extend a recent model-based
framework4 for reconstructing SAP-EPI
to minimize off-resonance induced blurring artifacts. Moreover, locally-low-rank (LLR) regularization5 is
incorporated to estimate per-blade phase calibrations.METHODS
I. Discrete Signal Model for
Single-Blade SAP-EPI: EPI
uses high readout bandwidths such that $$$ \Delta{t}<<T$$$, where
$$$\Delta{t}$$$ and $$$T$$$ are dwell time and echo-spacing, respectively - thus
$$$\Delta{t}\approx{0}$$$ can
be assumed, thereby off-resonance effects primarily manifest along the phase-encoding
direction. With discretizing6,
time-segmenting7, and polarity
flipping, the single-blade SAP-EPI signal measured during readout $$$m\in [0\,M]$$$ of
phase-encoding line $$$n\in [0\,N]$$$ can
be modeled as: $$g_{c,\alpha}[m,n]=\sum_{l=0}^{L}Λ_{l}(n)\left\{\sum_{p=0}^{P-1}\sum_{q=0}^{Q-1}s_c[p,q]u[p,q]e^{-j(\triangle{w_0}[p,q][\curlyvee_l-\frac{N-1}{2}]T}e^{-j(k_{x,\alpha}[m]p+k_{y,\alpha}[n]q))}\right\}+\epsilon_{c,\alpha}[m,n]---(1)$$
where $$$Λ_{l}$$$ is
a spectral window, $$$\curlyvee_l$$$ denotes the center of segment $$$l$$$ and
$$$p\in[0\,P]$$$ and $$$q\in[0\,Q]$$$ are
pixel indices.
$$$u$$$ is
the complex-valued target image,
$$$k_{x,\alpha}$$$ and $$$k_{y,\alpha}$$$ are
the k-space coordinates in the readout and phase-encoding dimensions associated
with blade angle
$$$\alpha$$$. $$$s_c$$$ is
the sensitivity profile for coil $$$c\in[0\,C-1]$$$, $$$\triangle{w_0}$$$ is
the off-resonance, and
$$$\epsilon$$$ is
Gaussian noise. Defining $$$W_l=diag\left\{e^{-j(\triangle w_0[p,q][\curlyvee_l-\frac{N-1}{2}]T}\right\}$$$ and
$$$S=[diag\left\{S_0\right\}\cdots{diag}\left\{S_{C-1}\right\}$$$, Eq. (1) abstracts to:
$$G_\alpha=\left(I{\otimes}\sum_{l=0}^{L}Λ_lF_\alpha{W_l}\right)Su_\alpha+\epsilon_\alpha=A_\alpha{u_\alpha}+\epsilon_\alpha---(2)$$
where $$$F_\alpha$$$ is the
Fourier transform (or type-II NUFFT) and $$$\otimes$$$ is
Kronecker’s product.
II.
Joint Multi-blade Image Reconstruction with virtual-coil LLR: The virtual-coil LLR8,9
is performed to handle partial Fourier sampling.
A
set of target images ($$$u_\alpha$$$) are
obtained
by minimizing the following convex cost function.
$${\min_{\left\{u_1,...u_{N_\alpha}\right\}\in{\mathbb{C}}}}{\left\{\beta\sum_{b\in{\Psi}}\parallel{R_b}(\sum_{\alpha=1}^{N_\alpha}(u_\alpha\delta_\alpha^T+\overline{u_\alpha}\delta_{\alpha+N_\alpha}^T))\parallel_{*}+\sum_{\alpha=1}^{N_\alpha}\parallel{A_\alpha}{u_\alpha}-G_\alpha\parallel_2^2\right\}---(3)}$$
$$$\beta>0$$$ is
a regularization parameter. $$$\delta$$$ is
Kronecker delta. Operator $$$R_b$$$ extracts the $$$b^{th}\,(B^2\times2N_\alpha)$$$ blocks from the set $$$\Psi$$$ and reshapes each block into Casorati-matrix.
Note that there are $$$2N_\alpha$$$ blades in total, including
actual acquired blades
and virtual blades with “$$$\bar{u}$$$
” denoting complex-conjugation. The nuclear norm ($$$\parallel\cdot\parallel_*$$$) is the convex
envelope of the rank functional. The optimization problem in (3) can
be solved using fast composite splitting algorithm10
(FCSA), a generalization of the Fast Iterative Shrinkage Algorithm
(FISTA) that allows
independent management of penalties, which herein coincides with blockwise singular
value thresholding (SVT) of the (conjugate) augmented Castorati matrices along
with aggregation of nominal and virtual blade blocks.
III. Data Acquisition and
Processing: In-vivo experiments were performed on a whole‐body 7T-MRI scanner (Siemens
Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany) equipped with a gradient coil type SC72AB
(70mT/m and 200 T/m/s) using a 32‐channel head-coil (Nova Medical, Wilmington,
MA, USA). A healthy-volunteer was scanned after informed consent according to
institutional review board-approved (IRB) protocol. six-echo SPGR and single-shot
EPI were acquired using vendor-provided sequences. For ssEPI, the FOV
was tilted eight times with different angles (22.5 degree each), resulting in SAP-EPI
acquisition where readout is 64 samples, 256 phase-encoding steps, 6/8 partial
Fourier, and SENSE-factor of 4. SPGR
data were utilized for estimating the B0-field-map via fat-water separation
toolbox11. In addition, coil
sensitivity maps were estimated from their first echo data using the ESPIRiT
technique12. The proposed MBIR was performed in
Matlab using 20 iterations of FISTA with
manually optimized $$$\beta\,(\beta=0.02)$$$, block-size 7⨯7, 2X-oversampled type-II
NUFFT with a width $$$J=5$$$ Kaiser-Bessel kernel, and $$$L=N_{PE}$$$ time segments. Ramp sampling and odd-even phase correction was performed offline prior
to MBIR.RESULTS
RESULTS: Fig. 1 shows 1D-phase differences between positive and negative readout
echoes corresponding to the eight blades with different angles. After being
fitted by magnitude weighted least squares, their slopes and intercepts are in
the ranges of $$$[0.026\,0.031]$$$ and $$$[-2.54\,-1.62]$$$, respectively. Fig. 2a shows
blade specific images obtained using standard SENSE reconstruction. These
images look slightly blurry since only 64 samples along the readout were
acquired and used to create 256x256 images after zero padding. The yellow
circles highlight the geometric distortions that appear differently at
different blade angles. The magnitude combination of eight blade images is
shown in Fig. 3a, where the blurring artifact is highly visible, particularly
in strong B0 field inhomogeneity regions highlighted by the red-circle (Fig. 3c),
with up to 120 Hz. Fig. 3b shows that the proposed reconstruction can
provide promising results – the blurring artifacts appear much reduced (red-circle) and the resolution is visibly improved.DISCUSSIONS
The proposed
extended version of MBIR with LLR enables high-resolution SAP-EPI
images with no need for phase calibration of different multi-blade directions. Typically,
N/2-Nyquist ghosting in oblique-FOV-EPI is visible after standard 1D-phase
correction due to cross-term gradient induced non-linear phase errors. However,
in this study the 1D zeroth and first orders phase correction appears
sufficient. This may be due to the use of short readout time, thus higher than
first orders phase errors may be negligible. Highly accurate B0 field maps are
crucial for the proposed scheme. Thus, highly effective technique in creating B0
maps, such as PSF13 may help to
improve the image quality even further. It has been discussed how many
shots/blades are sufficient for LLR. This point will be further investigated in
future studies. Finally, the computational time is proportional to the number
of blades, time segments and coil numbers. These issues may be handled by
parallel-computing and coil compression14,
respectively.Acknowledgements
This
work was supported by NIH U01 EB024450 and SFB 1436 project Z02.References
1.
Skare S, Newbould RD, Clayton DB, Bammer
R. Propeller EPI in the other direction. Magn Reson Med. 2006; 55(6):1298‐1307.
2.
Wen Q, Kodiweera C, Dale BM, Shivraman G,
Wu YC. Rotating single-shot acquisition (RoSA) with composite reconstruction
for fast high-resolution diffusion imaging. Magn Reson Med. 2018; 79(1):264‐275.
3.
Chang HC, Chuang TC, Lin YR, Wang FN,
Huang TY, Chung HW. Correction of geometric distortion in Propeller echo planar
imaging using a modified reversed gradient approach. Quant Imaging Med Surg.
2013; 3(2): 73-81.
4.
Yarach
U , Bernstein MA, Huston J-III, In MH, Kang D, Shu Y, Gray EM, Meyer M, and
Trzasko JD. Model-Based Single-Shot EPI Reconstruction with Sparsity
Regularization. In
Proc. Int. Soc. Magn. Reson. Med. 2019; pp. 0929.
5. Trzasko JD, Manduca A and Borisch E, Local versus global low-rank promotion in dynamic MRI
series reconstruction,
in Proc. Int. Soc. Magn.
Reson. Med,, 2011, p. 4371.
6.
Fessler J.A. Model‐based image reconstruction for MRI. IEEE
Signal Process Mag 2010; 27:81–89.
7.
Sutton B., Noll D., Fessler J. Fast, iterative image
reconstruction for MRI in the presence of field inhomogeneities. IEEE Trans Med
Imaging 2003; 22: 178–188.
8.
Trzasko JD,
Manduca A. Calibrationless parallel MRI using CLEAR.
In Conference Record of the Forty Fifth Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems
and Computers (ASILOMAR), Pacific Grove, CA,
2011. pp. 75– 79.
9.
Levine, E, Stevens, K, Beaulieu, C,
Hargreaves, B. Accelerated three-dimensional multispectral MRI with robust
principal component analysis for separation of on- and off-resonance signals. Magn
Reson Med 2017; 79(3): 1495–1505.
10.
Junzhou H, Shaoting Z, Hongsheng L,
Dimitris M. Composite splitting algorithms for convex optimization, Computer
Vision and Image Understanding 2011; 115(12): 1610-1622.
11.
Hu H, Börnert P , Hernando D, et al. ISMRM
workshop on fat–water separation: Insights, applications and progress in MRI.
Magn Reson Med, vol. 68, no. 2, pp. 378–388, 2012.
12.
Uecker M,
Lai P, Murphy MJ, Virtue P, Elad M, Pauly JM, Vasanawala SS, Lustig M. ESPIRiT—an eigenvalue
approach to autocalibrating parallel MRI: where SENSE meets GRAPPA. Magn
Reson Med 2014; 71: 990– 1001.
13.
In MH, Speck O. Highly accelerated PSF-mapping for EPI
distortion correction with improved fidelity. Magn Reson Mater Phy 2012; 25:
183–192.
14.
Zhang T,
Pauly JM, Vasanawala SS, Lustig M. Coil compression for
accelerated imaging with Cartesian sampling. Magn Reson Med 2013; 69: 571–
582.