Feng Xu1,2, Dan Zhu3, Hongli Fan2,3, Hanzhang Lu1,2, Dapeng Liu1,2, Wenbo Li1,2, and Qin Qin1,2
11The Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States, 2F.M. Kirby Research Center for Functional Brain Imaging, Kennedy Krieger Institute, Baltimore, MD, United States, 3Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States
Synopsis
Standardized
perfusion phantom
allows for controlling reproducibility of arterial spin
labeling (ASL)
techniques across multiple
sites, field strength, and vendors. Here using
a commercial
perfusion phantom, velocity-selective inversion (VSI) prepared ASL was
compared with PCASL with an emphasis on velocity-encoding
directions. While this effect is
amplified on this phantom with
feeding channels having only vertical and transverse flow directions, VSI-ASL with a tilted encoding
direction achieved higher labeling efficiency through more uniform labeling of
the entire feeding tubes. Careful selection of velocity-encoding directions
along the major feeding arteries is recommended for VSASL applications to
attain optimal labeling efficiency.
Introduction
Velocity-selective
inversion (VSI) prepared
VSASL, first demonstrated for measuring cerebral blood flow (CBF)1, have been applied successfully for
perfusion mapping of different organs2-6. The labeling utility
of the Fourier-Transform
(FT) based VS
pulse train was directly visualized in cerebral VSMRA7. It is well recognized that
standardized perfusion phantoms, that provide predictable, reproducible, and
quantifiable flow dynamics, would facilitate the utilization of advanced ASL
techniques across multiple sites, field strength, and vendors8,9. A commercial perfusion phantom QASPER was recently
introduced10. It has been quantitatively
characterized by two common ASL methods, flow-sensitive alternating inversion recovery
(FAIR)10 and pseudo-continuous ASL (PCASL)11-14. In this work, VSI prepared VSASL was compared with PCASL
using QASPER at a 3T scanner.Methods
Experiments were conducted on a 3T Philips Ingenia scanner
using a 32-channel head-only coil for signal reception. The specifics of the
QASPER phantom are described online (goldstandardphantoms.com/qasper). The MRA
results (detailed below) delineates the structure of the phantom (Figure 1a, b),
which contains the main feeding tube within the label chamber (for PCASL) and
the diverted 60 channels feeding the perfusion chamber with a stack of
perfusion material consisting of six porous layers.
Two controlled flow rates, first 350mL/min and then
175mL/min, were used in this experiment. 2D phase-contrast (PC) MRIs were
acquired before and after the MRA and ASL scans to verify the delivered
flow. At each flow rate, in addition to
TOF and PCASL, FT-VSS based MRA and FT-VSI based VSASL were each performed with
three velocity-encoding directions, foot-head (FH), left-right (LR), and oblique
45° on the coronal plane (O45°) (Figure 1c). The FT-VS pulse trains used in the
current work was described previously (6).
The acquisition parameters of TOF and VSMRA were: FOV=180x180x40
mm3, acquired/ reconstructed resolution=0.7x0.7x1.0/0.35x0.35x0.5mm3,
duration=3min.
Post labeling delay (PLD) of VSI-ASL was 1500ms (1,6). PCASL used labeling duration=1800ms and PLD=1800ms.
The labeling plane was 60mm below the center of imaging volume. The acquisition
parameters were 3D GRASE, FOV=180x180x30mm3, acquired/reconstructed
resolution=1.8x1.9x5.0/1.4x1.4x5.0mm3, 6 slices, EPI factor=15,
SENSE=2, TSE factor=6, shot duration=109 ms, TE=18ms, and TR=4.8s/5.0s for VSASL/PCASL.
Three pairs of label and control scans were of 3.5 min. An M0 was acquired with
the same parameters but TR of 10s.
Ring ROIs (Figure 4) were generated from ASL
difference images to investigate the effect of angular directions. Two sectors
of 45° on the left side and top were selected on slice#5 (Figure 4 marked by
green and yellow lines) for comparing perfusion-weighted signal between flow
rates and across methods. Slice #5 was above the 60 vertical arteriole channels
at slice #4. CBF derived from PCASL at 350 (PCASL-350) mL/min used labeling
efficiency of 0.85. As flow rate was known, labeling efficiency of all VSASL and
PCASL-175 mL/min was determined by scaling their derived CBF to be equal to
PCASL-350mL/min CBF.Results and Discussion
Figure 2 shows the comparison among TOF, VSMRA with
FH, LR and O45° velocity-encoding directions at slices #29 and #59 for both 175
and 350 mL/min flow rates. VSMRA reveals the dependence on the velocity-encoding
directions, such that signal is minimum when flow direction is orthogonal to
the encoding direction. With O45°, the loss of signal along the LR direction is
mitigated. There is a central dark band along AP direction due to its
perpendicular direction to O45° (#29).
Figure 3 shows the raw difference images among PCASL,
VSASL with encoding directions of FH, LR and O45° at two flow rates. VSASL (FH)
showed narrower perfusion ring than PCASL, as it missed about 500/1000ms bolus
(for 350/175 mL/min) at the 60 transversal channels due to its poor labeling
efficiency shown in Figure 2(a, b). Conversely, VSASL (LR) demonstrated higher
perfusion signal at the left and right sides, as a result of the effective labeling
bolus in the transversal channels along LR directions. VSASL (O45°) combines
labeling bolus obtained by FH and LR, thus yielding strongest perfusion signal
at the left and right sides.
Perfusion signal as a function of angular direction
was illustrated in Figure 4. Signal dips of LR and O45° at 90° reflects their
direction dependence at the transversal plane. Averaged normalized signal
(diff/M0) from the left and top sectors were listed in Table 1a. Perfusion
signals of VSASL (O45°) at the left-side ROI at the 350mL/min flow rate are almost
two times of the ones at the 175mL/min, like the PCASL results. By setting
PCASL-350 mL/min as a reference, the labeling efficiency was calculated and
listed in Table 1b. As expected, O45° left side had the highest labeling
efficiency (~0.78) across flow rates and ROIs among VSASL methods.Conclusion
Direction
dependence of VSI prepared ASL is amplified on the QASPER phantom as the feeding channels have only
vertical and transverse flow directions.
When using a tilted encoding direction with more uniform labeling through the
feeding tubes, VSI-ASL achieved higher labeling efficiency than using suboptimal
encoding directions and yielded perfusion signals proportional to the controlled
flow rate. Careful selection of velocity-encoding directions along the major
feeding arteries is recommended for VSASL applications in various organs to
attain optimal labeling efficiency.Acknowledgements
We want to thank Aaron Oliver-Taylor and Xavier Golay for providing guidance of using the QASPER phantom.References
1. Qin
Q, van Zijl PC. Velocity-selective-inversion prepared arterial spin labeling.
Magn Reson Med 2016;76(4):1136-1148.
2. Hernandez-Garcia
L, Nielsen JF, Noll DC. Improved sensitivity and temporal resolution in
perfusion FMRI using velocity selective inversion ASL. Magn Reson Med
2019;81(2):1004-1015.
3. Franklin
SL, Bones IK, Harteveld AA, Hirschler L, van Stralen M, Qin Q, de Boer A,
Hoogduin JM, Bos C, van Osch MJP, Schmid S. Multi-organ comparison of
flow-based arterial spin labeling techniques: Spatially non-selective labeling
for cerebral and renal perfusion imaging. Magn Reson Med 2020.
4. Guo
J, Das S, Hernandez-Garcia L. Comparison of velocity-selective arterial spin
labeling schemes. Magn Reson Med 2020.
5. Landes
V, Javed A, Jao T, Qin Q, Nayak K. Improved velocity-selective labeling pulses
for myocardial ASL. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 2020;84(4):1909-1918.
6. Liu
DP, Xu F, Li WB, van Zijl PC, Lin DRD, Qin Q. Improved
velocity-selective-inversion arterial spin labeling for cerebral blood flow
mapping with 3D acquisition. Magn Reson Med 2020;84:2512-2522.
7. Qin
Q, Shin T, Schär M, Guo H, Chen H, Qiao Y. Velocity-selective
magnetization-prepared non-contrast-enhanced cerebral MR angiography at 3
Tesla: Improved immunity to B0/B1 inhomogeneity. Magn Reson Med 2016;75(3):1232-1241.
8. Keenan
KE, Ainslie M, Barker AJ, Boss MA, Cecil KM, Charles C, Chenevert TL, Clarke L,
Evelhoch JL, Finn P, Gembris D, Gunter JL, Hill DLG, Jack CR, Jr., Jackson EF,
Liu G, Russek SE, Sharma SD, Steckner M, Stupic KF, Trzasko JD, Yuan C, Zheng
J. Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging phantoms: A review and the need for
a system phantom. Magn Reson Med 2018;79(1):48-61.
9. Kamphuis
ME, Greuter MJW, Slart R, Slump CH. Quantitative imaging: systematic review of
perfusion/flow phantoms. Eur Radiol Exp 2020;4(1):15.
10. Oliver-Taylor
A, Gonçalves M, Hampshire T, Davis B, Daga P, Evans L, Bainbridge A,
Wheeler-Kingshott C, Sokolska M, Thornton J, De Vita E, Golay X. A Calibrated
Perfusion Phantom for Quality Assurance of Quantitative Arterial Spin
Labelling. ISMRM. Honolulu, Hawaii, USA. 2017. p 0681.
11. Golay
X, Oliver-Taylor A, Susuzi Y, Chappell M. How to quantity ASL values in a
perfusion phantom. ESMRMB. Rotterdam, Netherlands. 2019. p 1672.
12. Oliver-Taylor
A, Hampshire T, Mutsaerts HJ, Clement P, Warnert E, Kuijer JPA, Baas K, Petr J,
Siero JCW, Marques JP, Sunaert S, Borra RJH, van Osch MJP, Golay X, Achten E. A
multi-site round robin assessment of ASL using a perfusion phantom. ISMRM.
Montréal, QC, Canada. 2019. p 2653.
13. Petitclerc
L, Teeuwisse WM, van Osch MJP. Characterization and Validation Protocol for a
Perfusion Phantom used in Arterial Spin Labeling Experiments. ESMRMB.
Rotterdam, Netherlands. 2019.
14. Warnert EAH, Steketee RME, Vernooij
MW, Ikram MA, Vogel M, Tamames JAH, Kotek G. Implementation and validation of
ASL perfusion measurements for population imaging. Magn Reson Med
2020;84(4):2048-2054.