Oliver Schad1,2, Tobias Wech1, and Herbert Köstler1
1Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany, 2University of Würzburg, Experimental Physics 5, Würzburg, Germany
Synopsis
Keywords: Gradients, Safety, Peripheral Nerve Stimulation
The algorithm we present in this work designs
variable density spiral (VDS) trajectories and their respective gradient time courses
based on the Stanford VDS-tool. In addition to hardware limits (maximum
gradient strength and slew rate) a PNS threshold based on the SAFE-Model is
introduced.
Purpose
To consider peripheral nerve stimulation restrictions
for the automatic design of spiral k-space
trajectories. Introduction
Peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) can
occur in MR imaging of patients due to time varying magnetic fields. The
scanner manufacturers therefore implement security routines that prohibit the
execution of critical gradient waveforms, in compliance with the regulating standard.
For common gradient systems and manifold applications, the optimization of spiral
trajectories is frequently limited by PNS
and not only by maximum gradient strength and slew rate.
Schulte et al. 1 proposed the design of PNS optimized spirals using a
convolution model, showing increased scan efficiency in comparison to spirals
with globally reduced slew rate. Unfortunately, scanner manufacturers use different
models to predict PNS. On Siemens scanners the so-called SAFE-model
(Stimulation Approximation by Filtering and Evaluation 2) is implemented. In
this work, we present the design of PNS optimized spiral trajectories using the
SAFE-model in order to generate time efficient
gradient courses on a Siemens MAGNETOM Avanto system.Methods
Providing
arbitrary gradient time courses $$$G_i(t)$$$ on
the respective physical scanner axis (i=x,y,z), the SAFE-model calculates the resulting nerve
response $$$R_i(t)$$$ using
various coil-specific lowpass-filters, rectifiers and scaling factors for the
individual axis. A schematic illustration of the calculation process is shown
in Fig. 1. After
differentiation of $$$G_i(t)$$$ the time course
is split into three branches, each applying a RC-lowpass filter with time
constant $$$\tau$$$,
taking the absolute value and scaling with a factor $$$a$$$. In the second branch,
filtering and taking the absolute value are permuted. The sum of the three
contributions is then again scaled with an axis specific factor $$$g_i$$$ leading to the
nerve response of the respective axis. The
overall stimulation time course is then given by $$$PNS_\text{tot}=100\,\sqrt{R_x^2+R_y^2+R_z^2}$$$. Since the y-coil induces the strongest stimulation
impulse, the physical axis are unified by only considering the parameters of
the y-axis for our calculations.
The
main algorithm is created based on the VDS Matlab tool by Brian Hargreaves 3.
Here, the spiral trajectories start in a slew rate ($$$SR_\text{max}$$$)
limited regime until the maximum gradient strength ($$$G_\text{max}$$$) is
reached, which is then kept constant. Each point of the trajectory is
calculated iteratively by solving a quadratic equation, resulting from the
analytical description of the trajectory and using the solution with positive
sign to traverse the trajectory.
While
the positive solution increases the gradient strength and stimulation, the
negative solution generally leads to a decrease.
We
introduced a PNS-limited domain, by simultaneously calculating the PNS time
course for each step of the trajectory and considering positive and negative
solutions for the next time step. If the positive solution of the quadratic
equation leads to a stimulation threshold overshoot, while the negative
solution does not, a linear interpolation between the two solutions is performed.
Assuming that the stimulation model can be linearly approximated for short time
intervals, PNS can be kept constant by this approach.
A
schematic illustration of this process is shown in Fig. 2. In order to follow a given trajectory path, the
gradients must be adjusted using the available slew rate. The green circle depicts
all possible solutions for the i+2-th k-space point using $$$SR_\text{max}$$$. Its
cross-section with the trajectory leads to the two possible solutions
(decreasing and increasing gradient strength with $$$SR_\text{max}$$$ respectively). The minimal slew rate $$$SR_\text{min}$$$, required to stay
on the trajectory, corresponds to a vanishing root in the solution of the
quadratic equation. $$$SR_\text{min}$$$ keeps the gradient strength constant. By
interpolating between the two solutions with $$$SR_\text{max}$$$, another solution
can be found, which adjusts the slew rate according to the present PNS
restrictions.Data
An exemplary
spiral trajectory was created with the following parameters: $$$SR_\text{max}$$$= 170T/m/s,
$$$G_\text{max}$$$= 40mT/m (Avanto gradient coil limits), $$$FOV$$$ = 45cm (decreasing linearly to 15cm at $$$k_\text{max}$$$), $$$res$$$ = 1.5mm x 1.5mm, $$$N$$$ = 10 (interleaves). The PNS threshold was set
to 100%.Results
The
resulting gradient time courses with the respective slew rates and PNS-courses
are shown in Fig. 3. The original algorithm leads to a maximum stimulation of 116%
and a duration of 8.46ms. Since $$$G_\text{max}$$$ is not
reached, the gradient strength increases steadily with $$$SR_\text{max}$$$. The optimized method keeps PNS constant,
decreasing the gradient strength and the slew rate only when necessary, and
even increasing it, when possible. The duration of the PNS-optimized trajectory
increased by 1.7% to 8.60ms.Discussion
We
propose an altered version of the Stanford
VDS algorithm, which now also considers solutions with decreasing gradient
strength for the purpose of complying
with PNS restrictions.
The proposed strategy enables a versatile optimization of spiral trajectories with
the potential of applying arbitrary PNS models. For our specific case, the design of time-efficient spiral
trajectories for Siemens systems was enabled.Acknowledgements
We thank Brian Hargreaves for providing the
Matlab implementation for the design of variable density spirals (http://mrsrl.stanford.edu/~brian/mritools.html
(accessed: 17.06.2022)).
We further thank Filip Szczepankiewicz for providing a Matlab implementation
of the SAFE-model for the PNS-calculation (https://github.com/filip-szczepankiewicz/safe_pns_prediction).References
1. Schulte, R.F. and Noeske, R. (2015),
Peripheral nerve stimulation-optimal gradient waveform design. Magn. Reson.
Med., 74: 518-522. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.25440
2. Hebrank F., Gebhardt M. (2000),
Safe-Model - A New Method for Predicting Peripheral Nerve Stimulations in MRI,
Proc. Intl. Soc. Mag. Reson. Med., 8, Denver, CO, USA. 2007
3. Hargreaves B. (2001), Spin-manipulation methods for efficient magnetic resonance imaging, PhD thesis, Stanford, http://mrsrl.stanford.edu/~brian/mritools.html
(accessed: 17.06.2022)