Qi Liu1, Zihao Chen1,2, Qiufeng Liu3, Hualing Li3, Yang Yang3, Debiao Li2,4, and Jian Xu1
1United Imaging Healthcare, Houston, TX, United States, 2Department of Bioengineering, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, CA, United States, 3Department of Radiology, Tongji Hospital of Tongji Medical College, Wuhan, China, 4Biomedical Imaging Research Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, United States
Synopsis
Keywords: Liver, Liver, DCE
Motivation: To address the pain points in clinical abdomen DCE, including sacrifice of spatial resolution for temporal resolution, repeated breath-hold, risk of missing contrast arrival, and the need for separate T1 mapping scan.
Goal(s): To develop an all-in-one, push-button abdomen DCE technique that improves kinetic mapping.
Approach: It was developed using MR multitasking joint reconstruction and tested on volunteer and phantom.
Results: Its feasibility was proven. Its feature includes free-breathing, high spatial and temporal resolution, and embedded T1 and B1 mapping for kinetic modeling correction.
Impact: Abdomen
DCE with the proposed MR multitasking joint reconstruction approach can make clinical
liver DCE more accessible, more accurate and hassle-free, allowing further researches
on DCE in liver disease diagnosis.
Introduction
Dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI of the liver can
non-invasively characterize perfusion change in the parenchyma and angiogenic
activity in lesions [1]. However, its clinical adoption is hindered by 1) the
dilemma of choosing higher spatial or temporal resolution, 2) the need for
repeated breath-hold in conventional techniques, and 3) the need for separate
T1 and B1 mapping scans for kinetic modeling correction. Despite recent
developments in free-breathing DCE techniques [2-3], native T1 is either
presumed based on literature value, or obtained through
a separate breath-hold mapping scan that results in patient
discomfort and possible respiratory state mismatch.
Here an all-in-one, push-button abdomen DCE technique is
proposed to address the above three challenges. By employing the MR
multitasking framework that can resolve multiple ‘tasks’ simultaneously using a
low-rank tensor model [4-6], embedded B1 and T1 maps can be jointly
reconstructed with the DCE images from a single scan. This technique allows
free-breathing, achieves high DCE temporal resolution, and produces B1 and
native-T1 maps with the same high spatial resolution and matched respiratory
state as DCE images. The feasibility of this 6-min push-button technique is
evaluated.Methods
Sequence
design: A two-part,
3D spoiled-GRE sequence was developed (Figure 1). In Part I (IR), periodically
applied inversion recovery pulses and alternating excitation flip angles (3° and 10°) create B1 and T1 dependent magnetization
recovery. In Part II (DCE), a constant flip angle is used to capture post-contrast
signal change. The phase encodings follow randomized Gaussian distribution and every
eighth readout is a navigator line without phase encoding.
Reconstruction workflow: Data are jointly
reconstructed to produce co-registered images. The underlying multidimensional
images of Part I and II are represented by two tensors $$$A_{IR}$$$ (dimensions: spatial,
respiratory, inversion recovery and flip angle) and $$$A_{DCE}$$$ (dimensions:
spatial, respiratory, and DCE time-course), respectively. By applying
high-order singular value decomposition on the navigator readouts, the
respective multi-dimensional temporal basis $$$\Phi_{IR}$$$ and $$$\Phi_{DCE}$$$ can be
determined. Based on spatial-temporal correlation and tensor low-rankness, a
shared spatial subspace is assumed between $$$A_{IR}$$$ and $$$A_{DCE}$$$ such that $$$A_{IR}=\Phi_{IR}\times_{1}U$$$ and $$$A_{DCE}=\Phi_{DCE}\times_{1}U$$$, where $$$U$$$ is the shared
spatial factors. $$$U$$$ is recovered
by solving the optimization problem:
$$\widehat{U}=argmin_{U} ||d_{IR}-\Omega_{IR}(\Phi_{IR}\times_{1}FSU)||_2^{2} +||d_{DCE}-\Omega_{DCE}(\Phi_{DCE}\times_{1}FSU)||_2^{2} + R(U)$$
where $$$d$$$s are the acquired imaging data, $$$\Omega$$$s are the
undersampling operator, F is Fourier transform operator, S is the coil
sensitivity operator, and R is spatial
regularization operator in the form of total variation.
Resolving respiratory motion:
Preliminary real-time images at certain inversion times in Part
I exhibit minimal intensity due to magnetization zero-crossing thus prevent accurate
diaphragm detection using image processing. Here a hybrid approach is proposed
(Figure 2). Respiratory state is identified by the modified k-means clustering algorithm
and then linearly correlated with diaphragm position using data points away
from zero-crossing. Subsequently this correlation is propagated to produce
diaphragm position throughout the scan, based on which respiratory binning is
carried out.
Contrast concentration:
Ignoring T2* decay, pixel-wise $$$T_{1}(t)$$$ is related to
signal intens
ity $$$S(t)$$$ by:
$$S(t)=\sin(\alpha\cdot\beta)\cdot M_{0} \cdot \frac{1-e^{-TR/T_{1}(t)}}{1-\cos(\alpha\cdot\beta)\cdot e^{-TR/T_{1}(t)}}$$
where TR is repetition
time, $$$\alpha$$$ is the nominal
flip angle, and $$$\beta$$$ is the B1
field.
Given knowledge of $$$T_{0}(t)$$$, contrast agent concentration $$$C(t)$$$ can be
calculated by:
$$C(t)=(\frac{1}{T_{1}(t)}-\frac{1}{T_{1}(0)})/\gamma$$
where $$$\gamma$$$ is relaxivity.
Study experiment: Data were acquired on a clinical 3T
scanner (uMR 790, United Imaging Healthcare). Imaging parameters are summarized in Table 1.
Three volunteers were recruited after IRB consent. Single dose Gd (Omniscan, GE Healthcare) bolus was intravenously injected with the flow rate of
2.0 ml/s. For kinetic modeling, images were imported to a United Imaging post-processing
workstation. After manually placing ROIs in the abdomen aorta and portal vein, a
dual-input single compartment liver model was used for pixel-wise kinetic parameter
fitting. To study the benefit of the embedded B1 and T1 maps for liver DCE,
kinetic modeling was performed twice, with and without B1 and T1 mapping.
An ISMRM/NIST phantom [7]
was also scanned to assess the accuracy of T1 quantification.Results
Typical DCE images and sample ROI signal curves are shown in
Figure 3, demonstrating good image quality and reasonable enhancement patterns.
Sample kinetic parameter maps with and without B1 and T1 correction are shown
in Figure 4, highlighting the importance of correction. Figure 5 shows phantom
T1 maps. Conclusion and discussion
An all-in-one, push-button abdomen DCE technique is proposed
and evaluated on volunteers and phantoms. It has the potential to overcome some
of the pain points in clinical abdomen DCE, namely, sacrifice of spatial
resolution for temporal resolution, repeated breath-hold, risk of failing to
capture contrast arrival, and the need for separate T1 mapping scan.Acknowledgements
This work was partially facilitated by a non-exclusive
license agreement between Cedars-Sinai Medical Center and United Imaging
HealthcareReferences
[1] Do RK, Rusinek H, Taouli B. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR
imaging of the liver: current status and future directions. Magn Reson Imaging
Clin N Am. 2009;17(2):339-349.
[2] Weiss J, Ruff C, Grosse U, Grözinger G, Horger M,
Nikolaou K, Gatidis S. Assessment of Hepatic Perfusion Using GRASP MRI:
Bringing Liver MRI on a New Level. Invest Radiol. 2019 Dec;54(12):737-743.
[3] Yoon JH, Lee JM, Yu MH, et al. Simultaneous evaluation
of perfusion and morphology using GRASP MRI in hepatic fibrosis. Eur Radiol 32,
34–45 (2022).
[4] Christodoulou AG, Shaw JL, Nguyen C, Yang Q, Xie Y, Wang
N, Li D. Magnetic resonance multitasking for motion-resolved quantitative
cardiovascular imaging. Nat Biomed Eng. 2018;2(4):215.
[5] Wang N, Gaddam S, Wang L, et al. Six-dimensional
quantitative DCE MR Multitasking of the entire abdomen: Method and application
to pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Magn Reson Med. 2020; 84: 928– 948.
[6] Mao X, Lee H, Kwan AC, et al. 3D Joint Reconstruction of
Non-Contrast and Contrast-Enhanced CMR Multitasking. In: Proceedings of the 31st
annual meeting of ISMRM; 2022. Abstract 0274.
[7] Kathryn EK, Karl FS,
Michael AB, et al. Multi-site, multi-vendor comparison of T1 measurement using
ISMRM/NIST system phantom, ISMRM 2016: 3290