Xin Li1, Hannes M. Wiesner1, Matt Waks1, Xiao-Hong Zhu1, and Wei Chen1
1Center for magnetic Resonance Research (CMRR), Department of Radiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States
Synopsis
In vivo 31P MRS imaging (MRSI) is
important for studying cerebral energy metabolism, intracellular NAD and redox
ratio. However, it is challenging to achieve high spatiotemporal resolution
owing to limited 31P sensitivity and low phosphorus metabolites
concentration. We had demonstrated that ultrahigh field (UHF) could
significantly improve the 31P-MRS sensitivity and spectral
resolution. In this study, we designed and constructed a loop-dipole 31P-1H
probe, which could operate at 7T and 10.5T for quantitative comparison of 31P
MRSI signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) between the two fields. We found that the
apparent SNR at 10.5T was significantly higher than that of 7T.
Introduction
In vivo 31P MRS/MRSI detects various phosphorous
metabolites involving ATP energy and phospholipid metabolisms and NAD redox state
in human brain1-3. The abnormality observed in the 31P studies
reflects brain diseases4-6. However, it is challenging to achieve
high spatiotemporal resolution owing to a lower 31P γ ratio and very low phosphorus metabolites
concentration. Previous studies7-8 have shown that increasing
magnetic field strength (B0) can largely improve the 31P detection
sensitivity and spectral resolution. However, the improvement depends on many
factors including B0, RF coil quality factor (Q), the longitudinal
relaxation time (T1) and the resonance linewidth (∆V1/2). In this work, we
analyzed and compared the 31P-MRSI SNR between 7T and the world’s
first 10.5T whole-body human scanner.Method
RF
coil construction: We designed and constructed a loop-dipole 31P-1H
probe with passive decoupling, which could be operated at 7T or 10.5T
frequencies. As shown in Fig. 1A-B, the 31P loop coil has a 7.5cm
outer diameter. The 1H dipole coil was located 2.5 cm away from the 31P
loop coil plane. One matching circuit was used for the 31P loop
coil, and two matching circuits for the 1H dipole coil. The coil Q
factor was measured using -7dB from the 0dB baseline of the S11 plot
as demonstrated in Fig. 1C-D.
31P MRSI Experiment: The
31P MRSI experiments were performed on an inorganic phosphate (Pi)
phantom (100mM, similar loading effect as human head and T1,Pi was
approximately 300ms at 7T) on 7T and 10.5T human scanners (SIEMENS, Germany) using the dual-channel 31P-1H
loop-dipole coil. Figure 2C shows the set-up of the loop-dipole coil loaded
with the Pi phantom. B0 shimming was performed over an 8cm cube at
the bottom of the phantom near the coil. Then, the 3D 31P chemical
shift images (CSIs) with an array of voltages were acquired with an FOV of 15cm
covering the entire phantom. At both field strengths, we used the same CSI
parameters: TR=1500ms (fully relaxed condition), TE=0.5ms, excitation hard pulse
length=500us, and spectral width=5000Hz.
SNR
quantification: The 31P FID data from
each CSI voxel was transformed to a spectrum with a 10Hz line broadening. As
show on Fig. 3, for each CSI voxel, the Pi resonance intensities measured with different
excitation voltages were fitted to a sine function. The peak intensity
determined by the regression of the sine wave function at the flip angle of 90o
presented the ultimate (or largest) Pi signal (SL) that could be achieved
in a particular voxel. We selected 10 voxels from the similar location near the
center of the coil sensitive region for both field strengths to calculate the mean
SL values at 7T and 10.5T, respectively; and 8 voxels outside of the
phantom acquired using zero excitation voltage (thus no Pi signal) to calculate
the standard deviation of the noise. To obtain the ultimate SNR for a selected voxel,
the SL value of each voxel was divided by the mean noise standard
deviation. Result
RF
coil performance: As shown in Fig. 1 C-D, the 31P loop coil
and 1H dipole coil were able to be tuned and matched to a S11
value of -15dB and -20dB, respectively, at both 7T and 10.5T. For both field
strengths, the S12 between the loop and dipole coil was less than
-20dB at the 31P resonant frequencies, showing an excellent
decoupling between the 31P and 1H coils.
SNR
comparison between 7T and 10.5T: Figure 3 illustrates one example of sine
function fitting to determine the SL value for a representative CSI voxel
at 7T. Figure 4 shows the 31P
SNR maps of three transversal slices at both field strengths. These SNR maps
are overlaid with the 3D-CSI 31P spectra acquired using the
excitation voltage approximately corresponding to the nominal 90° flip angle
for the global FID signal. For the selected 10 voxels, the ratio of the SNRs
measured at 10.5 T to 7 T was 1.5 ± 0.2 (see Table 1). Discussion
This study reports quantitative sensitivity comparison result
showing the SNR ratio (=1.5) of 31P MRSI imaged at 10.5T versus 7T
(with a B0 ratio of 1.5), thus, an approximate linear relation to B0
consistent with previous reports7,8. The linewidth effect at both 7T
and 10.5T were similar in this study, and the 1.5s TR allowed fully relaxed
condition at least for 7T measurement. Therefore, we can have a 31P SNR
ratio equation: SNR10.5T / SNR7T = (10.5/7)β Q0.5,
resulting β =1.7 using the
parameters listed in Table 1. This power dependence is slightly higher than previously
reported work4 where β =1.4-1.5 were found in human brain at 4T and
7T.Conclusion
We report the first 10.5T study that investigated the B0
dependence of 31P MRSI sensitivity by quantitative comparison
between 7T and 10.5T human scanners. The results suggest an approximately 50%
SNR gain at 10.5T as compared to 7T. In considering the SNR gain and
anticipated improvement of spectral resolution at 10.5T8, we expect
significant improvements for in vivo 31P MRSI human brain
application at 10.5T.Acknowledgements
This work was supported in part by the National Institutes
of Health grant: U01 EB026978, R01CA24095
and P41 EB027061.References
- Lei H, et al.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2003; 100:14409-14414.
- Du F, et al. Proc
Natl Acad Sci U S A 2008;105:6409-6414.
- Zhu X, et al.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2015; 112:2876-2881.
- Welch KM, et al. Neurol Clin. 1992; 10: 1–29.
- Hetherington HP, et al. J. Magn Reson Imaging
2002; 16: 477–483.
- Weiner MW, et al. Ann N. Y. Acad Sci 1987; 508:
287–299.
- Qiao H, et al. Magn Reson Imaging. 2006 Dec;
24(10): 1281–1286.
-
Lu M, et al. NMR Biomed 2014; 27:1135-1141.