Dataset Information

A phantom study comparing radial trajectories for accelerated cardiac 4D flow MRI against a particle imaging velocimetry reference.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Radial sampling is one method to accelerate 4D flow MRI acquisition, making feasible dual-velocity encoding (Venc) assessment of slow flow in the left ventricle (LV). Here, two radial trajectories are compared in vitro for this application: 3D radial (phase-contrast vastly undersampled isotropic projection, PC-VIPR) versus stack of stars (phase-contrast stack of stars, PC-SOS), with benchtop particle imaging velocimetry (PIV) serving as a reference standard.

Methods

The study contained three steps: (1) Construction of an MRI- and PIV-compatible LV model from a healthy adult's CT images. (2) In vitro PIV using a pulsatile flow pump. (3) In vitro dual-Venc 4D flow MRI using PC-VIPR and PC-SOS (two repeat experiments). Each MR image set was retrospectively undersampled to five effective scan durations and compared with the PIV reference. The root-mean-square velocity vector difference (RMSE) between MRI and PIV images was compared, along with kinetic energy (KE) and wall shear stress (WSS).

Results

RMSE increased as scan time decreased for both MR acquisitions. RMSE was 3% lower in PC-SOS images than PC-VIPR images in 30-min scans (3.8 vs. 3.9 cm/s) but 98% higher in 2.5-min scans (9.5 vs. 4.8 cm/s). PIV intrasession repeatability showed a RMSE of 4.4 cm/s, reflecting beat-to-beat flow variation, while MRI had intersession RMSEs of 3.8/3.5 cm/s for VIPR/SOS, respectively. Speed, KE, and WSS were overestimated voxel-wise in 30-min MRI scans relative to PIV by 0.4/0.3 cm/s, 0.2/0.1 μJ/mL, and 36/43 mPa, respectively, for VIPR/SOS.

Conclusions

PIV is feasible for application-specific 4D flow MRI protocol optimization. PC-VIPR is better-suited to dual-Venc LV imaging with short scan times.

SUBMITTER: Corrado PA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8109233 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A phantom study comparing radial trajectories for accelerated cardiac 4D flow MRI against a particle imaging velocimetry reference.

Corrado Philip A PA Medero Rafael R Johnson Kevin M KM François Christopher J CJ Roldán-Alzate Alejandro A Wieben Oliver O

Magnetic resonance in medicine 20210205 1

<h4>Purpose</h4>Radial sampling is one method to accelerate 4D flow MRI acquisition, making feasible dual-velocity encoding (Venc) assessment of slow flow in the left ventricle (LV). Here, two radial trajectories are compared in vitro for this application: 3D radial (phase-contrast vastly undersampled isotropic projection, PC-VIPR) versus stack of stars (phase-contrast stack of stars, PC-SOS), with benchtop particle imaging velocimetry (PIV) serving as a reference standard.<h4>Methods</h4>The st ...[more]

PMID: 33547658

Similar Datasets

Project description:Intraframe motion blurring, as a major challenge in free-breathing dynamic MRI, can be reduced if high temporal resolution can be achieved. To address this challenge, this work proposes a highly accelerated 4D (3D + time) dynamic MRI framework with subsecond temporal resolution that does not require explicit motion compensation. The method combines standard stack-of-stars golden-angle radial sampling and tailored GRASP-Pro (Golden-angle RAdial Sparse Parallel imaging with imProved performance) reconstruction. Specifically, 4D dynamic MRI acquisition is performed continuously without motion gating or sorting. The k-space centers in stack-of-stars radial data are organized to guide estimation of a temporal basis, with which GRASP-Pro reconstruction is employed to enforce joint low-rank subspace and sparsity constraints. This new basis estimation strategy is the new feature proposed for subspace-based reconstruction in this work to achieve high temporal resolution (e.g., subsecond/3D volume). It does not require sequence modification to acquire additional navigation data, it is compatible with commercially available stack-of-stars sequences, and it does not need an intermediate reconstruction step. The proposed 4D dynamic MRI approach was tested in abdominal motion phantom, free-breathing abdominal MRI, and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI). Our results have shown that GRASP-Pro reconstruction with the new basis estimation strategy enables highly-accelerated 4D dynamic imaging at subsecond temporal resolution (with five spokes or less for each dynamic frame per image slice) for both free-breathing non-DCE-MRI and DCE-MRI. In the abdominal phantom, better image quality with lower root mean square error and higher structural similarity index was achieved using GRASP-Pro compared with standard GRASP. With the ability to acquire each 3D image in less than 1 s, intraframe respiratory blurring can be intrinsically reduced for body applications with our approach, which eliminates the need for explicit motion detection and motion compensation.

Project description:PurposeTo improve velocity-to-noise ratio (VNR) and dynamic velocity range of 4D flow magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) by using dual-velocity encoding (dual-venc) with k-t generalized autocalibrating partially parallel acquisition (GRAPPA) acceleration.Materials and methodsA dual-venc 4D flow MRI sequence with k-t GRAPPA acceleration was developed using a shared reference scan followed by three-directional low- and high-venc scans (repetition time / echo time / flip angle = 6.1 msec / 3.4 msec / 15°, temporal/spatial resolution = 43.0 msec/1.2 × 1.2 × 1.2 mm3 ). The high-venc data were used to correct for aliasing in the low-venc data, resulting in a single dataset with the favorable VNR of the low-venc but without velocity aliasing. The sequence was validated with a 3T MRI scanner in phantom experiments and applied in 16 volunteers to investigate its feasibility for assessing intracranial hemodynamics (net flow and peak velocity) at the major intracranial vessels. In addition, image quality and image noise were assessed in the in vivo acquisitions.ResultsAll 4D flow MRI scans were acquired successfully with an acquisition time of 20 ± 4 minutes. The shared reference scan reduced the total acquisition time by 12.5% compared to two separate scans. Phantom experiments showed 51.4% reduced noise for dual-venc compared to high-venc and an excellent agreement of velocities (ρ = 0.8, P < 0.001). The volunteer data showed decreased noise in dual-venc data (54.6% lower) compared to high-venc, and improved image quality, as graded by two observers: fewer artifacts (P < 0.0001), improved vessel conspicuity (P < 0.0001), and reduced noise (P < 0.0001).ConclusionDual-venc 4D flow MRI exhibits the superior VNR of the low-venc acquisition and reliably incorporates low- and high-velocity fields simultaneously. In vitro and in vivo data demonstrate improved flow visualization, image quality, and image noise.Level of evidence2 Technical Efficacy: Stage 1 J. MAGN. RESON. IMAGING 2017;46:102-114.

Project description:PurposeRespiratory motion is one of the major challenges in radiotherapy. In this work, a comprehensive and clinically plausible set of 4D numerical phantoms, together with their corresponding "ground truths," have been developed and validated for 4D radiotherapy applications.MethodsThe phantoms are based on CTs providing density information and motion from multi-breathing-cycle 4D Magnetic Resonance imagings (MRIs). Deformable image registration (DIR) has been utilized to extract motion fields from 4DMRIs and to establish inter-subject correspondence by registering binary lung masks between Computer Tomography (CT) and MRI. The established correspondence is then used to warp the CT according to the 4DMRI motion. The resulting synthetic 4DCTs are called 4DCT(MRI)s. Validation of the 4DCT(MRI) workflow was conducted by directly comparing conventional 4DCTs to derived synthetic 4D images using the motion of the 4DCTs themselves (referred to as 4DCT(CT)s). Digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRRs) as well as 4D pencil beam scanned (PBS) proton dose calculations were used for validation.ResultsBased on the CT image appearance of 13 lung cancer patients and deformable motion of five volunteer 4DMRIs, synthetic 4DCT(MRI)s with a total of 871 different breathing cycles have been generated. The 4DCT(MRI)s exhibit an average superior-inferior tumor motion amplitude of 7 ± 5 mm (min: 0.5 mm, max: 22.7 mm). The relative change of the DRR image intensities of the conventional 4DCTs and the corresponding synthetic 4DCT(CT)s inside the body is smaller than 5% for at least 81% of the pixels for all studied cases. Comparison of 4D dose distributions calculated on 4DCTs and the synthetic 4DCT(CT)s using the same motion achieved similar dose distributions with an average 2%/2 mm gamma pass rate of 90.8% (min: 77.8%, max: 97.2%).ConclusionWe developed a series of numerical 4D lung phantoms based on real imaging and motion data, which give realistic representations of both anatomy and motion scenarios and the accessible "ground truth" deformation vector fields of each 4DCT(MRI). The open-source code and motion data allow foreseen users to generate further 4D data by themselves. These numeric 4D phantoms can be used for the development of new 4D treatment strategies, 4D dose calculations, DIR algorithm validations, as well as simulations of motion mitigation and different online image guidance techniques for both proton and photon radiation therapy.

Project description:PurposeTo validate a respiratory motion correction method called focused navigation (fNAV) for free-running radial whole-heart 4D flow MRI.MethodsUsing fNAV, respiratory signals derived from radial readouts are converted into three orthogonal displacements, which are then used to correct respiratory motion in 4D flow datasets. Hundred 4D flow acquisitions were simulated with non-rigid respiratory motion and used for validation. The difference between generated and fNAV displacement coefficients was calculated. Vessel area and flow measurements from 4D flow reconstructions with (fNAV) and without (uncorrected) motion correction were compared to the motion-free ground-truth. In 25 patients, the same measurements were compared between fNAV 4D flow, 2D flow, navigator-gated Cartesian 4D flow, and uncorrected 4D flow datasets.ResultsFor simulated data, the average difference between generated and fNAV displacement coefficients was 0.04 ± $$ \pm $$ 0.32 mm and 0.31 ± $$ \pm $$ 0.35 mm in the x and y directions, respectively. In the z direction, this difference was region-dependent (0.02 ± $$ \pm $$ 0.51 mm up to 5.85 ± $$ \pm $$ 3.41 mm). For all measurements (vessel area, net volume, and peak flow), the average difference from ground truth was higher for uncorrected 4D flow datasets (0.32 ± $$ \pm $$ 0.11 cm2 , 11.1 ± $$ \pm $$ 3.5 mL, and 22.3 ± $$ \pm $$ 6.0 mL/s) than for fNAV 4D flow datasets (0.10 ± $$ \pm $$ 0.03 cm2 , 2.6 ± $$ \pm $$ 0.7 mL, and 5.1 ± 0 $$ \pm 0 $$ .9 mL/s, p < 0.05). In vivo, average vessel area measurements were 4.92 ± $$ \pm $$ 2.95 cm2 , 5.06 ± $$ \pm $$ 2.64 cm2 , 4.87 ± $$ \pm $$ 2.57 cm2 , 4.87 ± $$ \pm $$ 2.69 cm2 , for 2D flow and fNAV, navigator-gated and uncorrected 4D flow datasets, respectively. In the ascending aorta, all 4D flow datasets except for the fNAV reconstruction had significantly different vessel area measurements from 2D flow. Overall, 2D flow datasets demonstrated the strongest correlation to fNAV 4D flow for both net volume (r2 = 0.92) and peak flow (r2 = 0.94), followed by navigator-gated 4D flow (r2 = 0.83 and r2 = 0.86, respectively), and uncorrected 4D flow (r2 = 0.69 and r2 = 0.86, respectively).ConclusionfNAV corrected respiratory motion in vitro and in vivo, resulting in fNAV 4D flow measurements that are comparable to those derived from 2D flow and navigator-gated Cartesian 4D flow datasets, with improvements over those from uncorrected 4D flow.

Dataset Information

A phantom study comparing radial trajectories for accelerated cardiac 4D flow MRI against a particle imaging velocimetry reference.

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

A phantom study comparing radial trajectories for accelerated cardiac 4D flow MRI against a particle imaging velocimetry reference.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets