John P. Neri1, Matthew F. Koff1, Kevin M. Koch2, and Ek T. Tan1
1Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, United States, 2Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, United States
Synopsis
Conventional echo-planar imaging (EPI) DWI suffers
from substantial artifact when imaging orthopedic hardware. DWI with multi-acquisition
with variable resonance image combination (MAVRIC) can reduce susceptibility artifact
around metal implants. The purpose of this work was to evaluate the
quantitative accuracy of DWI-MAVRIC near metal components using a diffusion
phantom. DWI-MAVRIC sequences were acquired in the presence of no metal,
cobalt-chromium, titanium, and stainless steel. It was found that DWI-MAVRIC
can accurately measure apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) in the presence of
metal. Among tested metals, stainless steel creates the greatest artifact that
prevented the acquisition of accurate ADC data.
Introduction
Diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) provides quantitative
apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurements which can be useful for imaging
soft tissue1. However, the conventional
echo-planar imaging (EPI) readout for DWI suffers
from strong susceptibility artifacts2 when imaging near
metal implants. Multi-acquisition with variable resonance image combination
(MAVRIC) is a multi-spectral imaging (MSI) technique that effectively reduces
susceptibility artifacts around orthopedic hardware3. Application of two-dimensional
MAVRIC4 with periodically
rotated overlapping parallel lines with enhanced reconstruction (PROPELLER) FSE
for DWI has been demonstrated5 to complement morphological
imaging with quantitative data to characterize synovitis near orthopedic
implants6 (Figure 1). While
the quantitative accuracy of DWI-MAVRIC has been investigated7 , the potential ADC
bias when imaging near metallic components is unknown. Therefore, the purpose
of this work is to evaluate the quantitative accuracy of DWI-MAVRIC when orthopaedic
hardware of different metal compositions is present and to determine if spatial
variability exists for ADC measurements near these metal components. Methods
Phantom scanning was
performed using a Diffusion Standard Model 128 (CaliberMRI, Boulder, CO). The
phantom contained five vials of polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP): three vials of 0%
wt/wt PVP and two vials of 10% wt/wt PVP. A custom plastic holder was built to
secure cylindrical metal samples of common orthopaedic metals (11 mm diameter) collinear
to the five PVP vials (Figure 2). All images were acquired at iso-center on a 1.5T
MRI scanner (MR450, GE Healthcare) with an 8-channel cardiac coil. Repeated
DWI-EPI and DWI-MAVRIC (b= 600 s/mm2, 3 spectral bins) scans were performed
in the coronal plane with different configurations of the phantom: 1. No metal
present; 2. Insertion of a cobalt-chromium sample; 3. Insertion of a stainless
steel sample; 4. Insertion of a titanium sample (Figure 2). The metal samples
were oriented perpendicular to Bo. Additional DWI-MAVRIC (b= 600 s/mm2)
acquisitions, using 1 and 6 spectral bins, were acquired only for
cobalt-chromium and stainless steel samples. To evaluate angular dependence, DWI-MAVRIC
(b= 600 s/mm2, 3 bins) images were acquired with the phantom rotated
45o and 90o counter-clockwise for the stainless steel sample
only. The water temperature in the phantom was measured each time the metal
cylinders were replaced to ensure stable vial temperature. Images were
processed (MATLAB, Mathworks,
Natick, MA) to generate ADC Maps with gradient nonlinearity correction
(GNC)8. ADC values were
obtained by placing two circular regions-of-interest (ROI) (44 voxels,
121 mm2) on each vial using ITK-SNAP9. To evaluate
effects of radial dependence, the centers of the segmentation labels were placed
at approximately 29, 41, 62, 75, 98, and 111 mm, respectively from the center
of the metal cylinders.Results
Minimal water temperature fluctuation was observed during
scanning (21.92-22.28oC). The vial ADC values at a mean temperature
of 22.1oC were 2171 and
1681µm2/s for the 0 and 10% PVP vials, respectively10. The DWI-EPI acquisition
demonstrated the least ADC error at all distances when no metal was present
(Figure 3). The DWI-MAVRIC acquisitions (3 bins) for the conditions of no
metal, cobalt-chromium and titanium demonstrated consistent positive bias at all
distances from the metal sample. The DWI-MAVRIC (3 bins) data for the stainless
steel sample could only be evaluated at 98 and 111 mm due to signal dropout at
shorter distances, and had greater ADC bias than the other configurations. ADC
data could be evaluated at closer distances to the metal for cobalt-chromium
and stainless steel when the number of spectral bins was increased (Figure 4).
At further distances from the metal, the ADC error near cobalt-chromium was comparable
for 1, 3, and 6 spectral bins. ADC could not be acquired at distances of 29 and
41 mm across all angles when using 3 bins in the presence of stainless steel (Figure 5). ADC
could be acquired at 62 and 75 mm at 45o and at distances of 98 and
111 mm for angles of 0o, 45o and 90o when using 3 bins in the
presence of stainless steel.Discussion
This study established radial-angular distance
dependence of quantitative ADC measurements for various metal inserts when using
DWI-MAVRIC. The ADC results for no metal, cobalt-chromium and titanium were in
agreement with a prior study of quantitative accuracy7; this study found
mean ADC error consistently around 5% between 29 and 111mm. However, for
stainless steel at distances 41 mm and under, ADC data could not be evaluated. At
45o from B0, ADC could be evaluated closer to stainless
steel, likely because of the known patterns of signal dropout longitudinal and
transverse to B0. These findings suggest that fewer DWI-MAVRIC spectral
bins may be required with cobalt-chromium and titanium implants than with stainless
steel, which in turn suggests that scan times can be optimized if the implant composition
is known11. This study did
not evaluate sizes and shapes of implants, which also influence signal dropout.
Future work will include ex vivo and in vivo validation with actual orthopedic
implants, and pulse sequence modifications to reduce the scan time of
DWI-MAVRIC. Conclusion
DWI-MAVRIC can accurately measure ADC in the presence
of various metals. The distance and angular orientations between soft tissues and
orthopedic implants should be considered when interpreting clinical ADC data
obtained using DWI-MAVRIC.Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the MRI administrative staff and MRI
technologists at Hospital for Special Surgery for their assistance in acquiring
images. Research
reported in this publication was supported by National Institute of Arthritis
and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases of the National Institutes of Health
under award number R01AR064840 and National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and
Bioengineering of the National Institutes of Health under award number R21EB023415.The content is solely
the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the
official views of the NIH.References
1. Le
Bihan D. Apparent diffusion coefficient and beyond : What diffusion mr imaging
can tell us about tissue structure. Radiology. 2013;268(2):318-322.
doi:10.1148/radiol.13130420
2. Farahani
K, Sinha U, Sinha S, Chiu LC-L, Lufkin RB. Effect of field strength on susceptibility
artifacts in magnetic resonance imaging. Comput Med Imaging Graph.
1990;14(6):409-413. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-6111(90)90040-I
3. Koch
KM, Lorbiecki JE, Hinks RS, King KF. A multispectral three-dimensional
acquisition technique for imaging near metal
implants. Magn Reson Med. 2009;61(2):381-390. doi:10.1002/mrm.21856
4. Hargreaves
BA, Taviani V, Litwiller D V, Yoon D. 2D multi-spectral imaging for fast MRI
near metal. Magn Reson Med. 2018;79(2):968-973. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.26724
5. Koch
KM, Bhave S, Gaddipati A, et al. Multispectral diffusion-weighted imaging near
metal implants. Magn Reson Med. 2018;79(2):987-993. doi:10.1002/mrm.26737
6. Gao
MA, Neri JP, Lin B, et al. Diffusion MRI of THAs for the Classification of Synovial
Reactions. In: ISMRM. Abstract #1243; 2021.
7. Neri
JP, Koff MF, Koch KM, Tan ET. Validating the Accuracy of Multi-Spectral Metal
Artifact Suppressed Diffusion-Weighted Imaging. In: ISMRM. Abstract #1753;
2021.
8. Tan
ET, Marinelli L, Slavens ZW, King KF, Hardy CJ. Improved correction for
gradient nonlinearity effects in diffusion-weighted imaging. J Magn Reson
Imaging. 2013;38(2):448-453. doi:10.1002/jmri.23942
9. Yushkevich
PA, Piven J, Hazlett HC, et al. User-guided 3D active contour segmentation of
anatomical structures: significantly
improved efficiency and reliability. Neuroimage. 2006;31(3):1116-1128.
doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.01.015
10. Wagner
F, Laun FB, Kuder TA, et al. Temperature and concentration calibration of
aqueous polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP) solutions for isotropic diffusion MRI
phantoms. Benjamini D, ed. PLoS One. 2017;12(6):e0179276.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0179276
11. Kaushik
SS, Marszalkowski C, Koch KM. External calibration of the spectral coverage for
three-dimensional multispectral MRI.
Magn Reson Med. 2016;76(5):1494-1503. doi:10.1002/mrm.26065