Artan Kaso1 and Thomas Ernst1
1Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States
Synopsis
Uncorrected head movement during DWI acquisitions can cause
signal dropouts, due to rotation-induced imbalances in gradient moments. Using
a fast optical tracking system, signal losses can be reversed by the realignment
of the scanner’s gradient axes with the moving head. However, while
experimentally the lost signals were recovered to a great extent, the residual
gradient moments were larger than anticipated by simulations. We demonstrated
that this was due to the discretized nature and asynchronous application of motion
updates in relation to the pulse sequence, which can effectively cause bias in the
correction of gradient moments.
Intoduction
The large amplitude and long duration of diffusion
sensitizing gradients make Diffusion Weighted Imaging (DWI) sensitive to
movements. “Intra-scan” rotations between excitation and readout can disturb
the gradient balance of a DWI sequence, which can push the signal (echo)
outside of the sampled k-space, and cause signal loss or dropouts [1]. Gradient
balances can be restored using prospective motion correction (PMC) [2]. Here,
we applied multiple updates to the gradient matrix within a single-shot
monopolar diffusion sequence. Updates were provided by a fast (60
frames/second) MR-compatible optical head tracking system. As noted previously [3],
intra-scan PMC updates were able to recover signals otherwise lost. However,
residual gradient moments with PMC were larger than anticipated, showing an
unusual bimodal dependence on angular velocities. This bifurcation was found to
be caused by the discretized nature and asynchronous application of motion
updates within the pulse sequence.Theory
The gradient moment imbalance (differential
moments with and without motion) $$$\Delta\vec{M}$$$ due to rotation while diffusion gradients
$$$\vec{G}^{DW}(t)$$$ play, is $$$\Delta\vec{M}=\int_{0}^{T}[\hat{1}-\hat{R}^{-1}(t)]\vec{G}^{DW}(t)dt$$$, where $$$\hat{R}(t)$$$ is the time dependent
rotation matrix (T<TE). Assuming a rotation $$$\theta(t)$$$ about the
y-axis yields:
$$\begin{equation}
\begin{bmatrix} \Delta M_{x} \\ \Delta M_{y} \\ \Delta M_{z} \end{bmatrix} = \int_{0}^{T}
\begin{bmatrix} 1-\cos(\theta(t)) & 0 & \sin(\theta(t)) \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \\ -\sin(\theta(t)) & 0 & 1-\cos(\theta(t))\end{bmatrix}
\begin{bmatrix} G_{x}^{DW} \\ G_{y}^{DW} \\ G_{z}^{DW} \end{bmatrix} dt
\end{equation}$$
with $$$\theta(0)=0$$$. Since the head can only rotate a few
degrees over ~100ms TE, we can perform a second-order Taylor expansion in $$$\theta$$$ and approximate $$$\theta(t)\approx\omega_{r}t+0.5\alpha_{r}t^2$$$, to obtain
$$\begin{array}{l}\Delta M_{x} \approx \omega_{r}\int_{0}^{T}G_{z}^{DW}(t)tdt +\frac{1}{2}\int_{0}^{T}(\omega_{r}^2G_{x}^{DW}(t)+\alpha_{r}G_{z}^{DW}(t))t^2dt \\
\Delta M_{z} \approx -\omega_{r}\int_{0}^{T}G_{x}^{DW}(t)tdt
+\frac{1}{2}\int_{0}^{T}(\omega_{r}^2G_{z}^{DW}(t)-\alpha_{r}G_{x}^{DW}(t))t^2dt
\end{array}$$
Hence, head rotation during diffusion gradient lobes creates:
- A first-order gradient moment, proportional to
the rotational velocity and a second-order gradient moment, proportional to the
rotational acceleration, perpendicular to the diffusion gradient and rotation axis.
- A second-order gradient moment, proportional to
the squared rotational velocity, in the diffusion gradient axis.
Methods
We simulated the residual gradient moment in the readout direction
(x-axis) with a diffusion gradient in phase encoding direction (z-axis). Since gradient
moments define k-space, residual moments offset the echo from the k-space
center. The offset is (to first order) proportional to the rotational velocity
during the diffusion interval.
We tested our PMC scheme on a gel-filled spherical phantom
with a rigidly attached tracking marker. Motion was tracked by an MR-compatible
camera. The phantom was rotated quasi-sinusoidally about y-axis during the DWI
monopolar sequence (TE/TR=80/500ms, b=1000s/m2, diffusion
sensitization in phase encode (z-axis), FOV=300mm, BW=2170Hz/Px, matrix=128x64,
5mm coronal, 216 repetitions). Since the phantom movement and scanning process
are asynchronous, each DWI acquisition reflects a random (but known) rotational
velocity. The echo-center k-space shift is used to determine the residual moment
($$$\Delta k_{x}^{max}=\gamma\Delta M_{x}$$$). The effectiveness of the proposed PMC scheme is quantified by the
reduction in residual gradient moments relative to simulations.Results
Simulation. Diffusion
gradient amplitude and timing are from the manufacturer's monopolar sequence (Fig.1a).
The object and gradient axes gradually
misalign due to the object’s rotation during the diffusion preparation
interval, and first- (Fig.1b) and second-order (Fig.1c) residual
moments are accrued. The simulation used $$$\omega_{r}=13^{\,\circ}/\mathrm{s}$$$ and $$$\alpha_{r}=60^{\,\circ}/\mathrm{s}^2$$$, which represent moderately fast human head rotations. For
the given EPI parameters, velocities $$$|\omega_{r}|>6^{\,\circ}/\mathrm{s}$$$ [residual moment $$$\gamma\Delta M_{x}=111(2\pi/\mathrm{m})$$$] cause signal dropout.
If a gradient realignment
(motion update) is applied immediately prior to the refocusing pulse, the
first-order moments and therefore echo-center offsets from k-space center are
substantially decreased. However, the
second-order residual moment is only partially corrected, causing residual
k-space offsets.
Experiment. Graphs in Figs.2,3 show the dependence of k-space shifts upon rotational velocities. Without PMC, only half of repetitions $$$|\omega_{r}|<6^{\,\circ}/\mathrm{s}$$$ remain within the sampling window (Figs.2a,3a). Conversely, with PMC, only 4%
of repetitions dropped out (Figs.2b,3b). However, the graph with PMC enabled shows two sub-populations (Fig.2b). We
hypothesized that this bifurcation is caused by the discrete number of motion
updates in the first TE/2 period. Specifically, at TE/2 =
40ms and 60 frames/second tracking rate (~17ms inter-packet time), either 2 or
3 tracking packets may arrive between the excitation and refocusing pulse. The gradient rotation applied is under-compensated for 2 updates, but over-compensated for 3
updates. Thus, matching TE/2 to a multiple of the inter-packet time
(17ms) should eliminate the bifurcation. This was confirmed experimentally at TE=68ms
(TE/2=34ms=2*17ms), where generally 2 motion updates are applied between excitation and refocusing (Fig.3b).
Also, since the variance due to 2 sub-populations is eliminated, an effect of
rotational accelerations becomes noticeable (Fig.3c, second-order
moment).Discussion
-
We
observe a considerable reduction in first-order residual moments in all
experiments with intra-sequence PMC, and linear dependence on
rotational velocity is but eliminated. However, substantial variance in
echo-center offsets remains even when accounting for the 2 sub-populations.
- Simulation suggests that our PMC scheme reduces
the second-order residual moment persistently, but this is not observed
experimentally. We attribute this to the asynchronous application of the
motion updates.
- The motion sensitivity of a given DWI sequence may
strongly depend upon the TE value in relation to the tracking rate.
Conclusion
Intra-sequence motion updates during DWI can markedly reduce
signal dropouts during fast head movements, and careful selection of TE values
might further decrease motion sensitivity. A secondary benefit is the
realignment of excitation and refocusing slices.Acknowledgements
Work supported by NIH grant 1R01
DA021146(BRP).
References
[1] Wedeen VJ., Weisskoff M., Poncelet BP. Magn Reson Med 32, 1994.
[2] Gumus K., Keating B., Poser BA., Armstrong B., Chang L., Maclaren
J., Prieto T., Speck O., Zaitsev M., Ernst T. Magn Reson Med 71, 2014.
[3] Herbst M., Maclaren J., Weigel M., Korvink
J., Zaitsev M. Magn Reson Med 67, 2012.