Acquisition Strategies for Multicontrast MRI in the Brain
Rasim Boyacioglu1
1Case Western Reserve University, United States

Synopsis

Multi-contrast brain MRI provides more information rapidly. Acquisition strategies for multi-contrast MRI are divided into three categories. The conventional methods are mainly focused on CS-type reconstructions to generate multiple contrasts. Recently developed multi-parameter quantitative techniques aim to map multiple tissue properties simultaneously. They are inherently rapid, provide registered quantitative maps and weighted images. They can be broadly grouped into two categories: 1) fast and dynamic scanning of sequences with fixed contrast (EPTI, STAGE, etc.), and 2) quasi-randomly varied steady-state based sequences (MRF, etc.). Synthetic images can be generated from quantified tissue properties to mimic conventional weighted images when needed.

Syllabus

Brain MRI techniques research focuses on the concepts of more, better and faster imaging. Pushing the boundaries on the spatio-temporal domain improves the existing MR sequences and makes 3D high-resolution imaging possible in minutes. The ability to obtain multiple contrasts in a single scan and provide more information is the remaining pillar. There are many approaches for multi-contrast imaging that overlap in the stages of acquisition, reconstruction and the generation of images. The following topics will be discussed in detail.
  • Conventional multi-contrast weighted imaging
  • Fixed sequence based multi-parameter quantitative mapping: EPTI, MRF-EPI, STAGE and others
  • Steady-state based multi-parameter quantitative mapping: MR Fingerprinting, MR multitasking, and others
  • Synthetic Imaging

Acknowledgements

No acknowledgement found.

References

1. Bilgic B, Goyal VK, Adalsteinsson E. Multi-contrast reconstruction with Bayesian compressed sensing. Magn. Reson. Med. 2011;66:1601–1615 doi: 10.1002/mrm.22956.

2. Dong Z, Wang F, Reese TG, Bilgic B, Setsompop K. Echo planar time-resolved imaging with subspace reconstruction and optimized spatiotemporal encoding. Magn. Reson. Med. 2020:1–14 doi: 10.1002/mrm.28295.

3. Rieger B, Zimmer F, Zapp J, Weingärtner S, Schad LR. Magnetic resonance fingerprinting using echo-planar imaging: Joint quantification of T1 and T2∗ relaxation times. Magn. Reson. Med. 2017;78:1724–1733 doi: 10.1002/mrm.26561.

4. Haacke EM, Chen Y, Utriainen D, et al. STrategically Acquired Gradient Echo (STAGE) imaging, part III: Technical advances and clinical applications of a rapid multi-contrast multi-parametric brain imaging method. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2020;65:15–26 doi: 10.1016/j.mri.2019.09.006.

5. Ma D, Gulani V, Seiberlich N, et al. Magnetic resonance fingerprinting. Nature 2013;495:187–92.

6. Christodoulou AG, Shaw JL, Nguyen C, et al. Magnetic resonance multitasking for motion-resolved quantitative cardiovascular imaging. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 2018;2:215–226 doi: 10.1038/s41551-018-0217-y.

7. Tanenbaum XLN, Tsiouris XAJ, Johnson XAN, et al. Synthetic MRI for Clinical Neuroimaging: Results of the Magnetic Resonance Image Compilation (MAGiC) Prospective, Multicenter, Multireader Trial. Am. J. Neuroradiol. 2017;38:1103–1110.

Proc. Intl. Soc. Mag. Reson. Med. 30 (2022)