GRAPPA-based susceptibility-weighted imaging of normal volunteers and patients with brain tumor at 7 T (original) (raw)

Abstract

Susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI) is a valuable technique for high-resolution imaging of brain vasculature that greatly benefits from the emergence of higher field strength MR scanners. Autocalibrating partially parallel imaging techniques can be employed to reduce lengthy acquisition times as long as the decrease in signal-to-noise ratio does not significantly affect the contrast between vessels and brain parenchyma. This study assessed the feasibility of a Generalized Autocalibrating Partially Parallel Acquisition (GRAPPA)-based SWI technique at 7 T in both healthy volunteers and brain tumor patients. GRAPPA-based SWI allowed a twofold or more reduction in scan time without compromising vessel contrast and small vessel detection. Postprocessing parameters for the SWI needed to be modified for patients where the tumor causes high-frequency phase wrap artifacts but did not adversely affect vessel contrast. GRAPPA-based SWI at 7 T revealed regions of microvascularity, hemorrhage and calcification within heterogeneous brain tumors that may aid in characterizing active or necrotic tumor and monitoring treatment effects.

Loading...

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

References (21)

  1. Haacke EM, Xu Y, Cheng YC, Reichenbach JR. Susceptibility weighted imaging (SWI). Magn Reson Med 2004;52(3):612-8.
  2. Sehgal V, Delproposto Z, Haacke EM, Tong KA, Wycliffe N, Kido DK, et al. Clinical applications of neuroimaging with susceptibility- weighted imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005;22(4):439-50.
  3. Sehgal V, Delproposto Z, Haddar D, Haacke EM, Sloan AE, Zamorano LJ, et al. Susceptibility-weighted imaging to visualize blood products and improve tumor contrast in the study of brain masses. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006;24(1):41-51.
  4. Ladd ME. High-field-strength magnetic resonance: potential and limits. Top Magn Reson Imaging 2007;18(2):139-52.
  5. Blaimer M, Breuer F, Mueller M, Heidemann RM, Griswold MA, Jakob PM. SMASH, SENSE, PILS, GRAPPA: how to choose the optimal method. Top Magn Reson Imaging 2004;15(4):223-36.
  6. Griswold MA, Jakob PM, Heidemann RM, Nittka M, Jellus V, Wang J, et al. Generalized autocalibrating partially parallel acquisitions (GRAPPA). Magn Reson Med 2002;47(6):1202-10.
  7. Pruessmann KP, Weiger M, Scheidegger MB, Boesiger P. SENSE: sensitivity encoding for fast MRI. Magn Reson Med 1999;42 (5):952-62.
  8. Sodickson DK, Manning WJ. Simultaneous acquisition of spatial harmonics (SMASH): fast imaging with radiofrequency coil arrays. Magn Reson Med 1997;38(4):591-603.
  9. Heidemann RM, Griswold MA, Haase A, Jakob PM. VD-AUTO- SMASH imaging. Magn Reson Med 2001;45(6):1066-74.
  10. Jakob PM, Griswold MA, Edelman RR, Sodickson DK. AUTO- SMASH: a self-calibrating technique for SMASH imaging. SiMulta- neous Acquisition of Spatial Harmonics. Magma 1998;7(1):42-54.
  11. Park J, Zhang Q, Jellus V, Simonetti O, Li D. Artifact and noise suppression in GRAPPA imaging using improved k-space coil calibration and variable density sampling. Magn Reson Med 2005;53 (1):186-93.
  12. Wang Z, Wang J, Detre JA. Improved data reconstruction method for GRAPPA. Magn Reson Med 2005;54(3):738-42.
  13. Sedlacik J, Herrmann K, Rauscher A, Reichenbach JR. SWI using different k-space undersampling mechanisms. Proceedings from the 13th Annual International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine Meeting. May 7-13, Miami, FL,; 2005.
  14. Lupo JM, Barnerjee S, Kelley DAC, Xu D, Vigneron DB, Majumdar S, et al. Partially-parallel, susceptibility-weighted MR imaging of brain vasculature at 7 Tesla using sensitivity encoding and an autocalibrating parallel technique. Proceedings from the 28th Annual International Conference of the IEEE-EMBS. August 30-September 3, New York, NY; 2006.
  15. Banerjee S, Choudhury S, Han ET, Brau AC, Morze CV, Vigneron DB, et al. Autocalibrating parallel imaging of in vivo trabecular bone microarchitecture at 3 Tesla. Magn Reson Med 2006;56(5):1075-84.
  16. Bydder M, Larkman DJ, Hajnal JV. Combination of signals from array coils using image-based estimation of coil sensitivity profiles. Magn Reson Med 2002;47(3):539-48.
  17. Wald LL, Carvajal L, Moyher SE, Nelson SJ, Grant PE, Barkovich AJ, et al. Phased array detectors and an automated intensity-correction algorithm for high-resolution MR imaging of the human brain. Magn Reson Med 1995;34(3):433-9.
  18. Dietrich O, Reeder S, Reiser MF, Schoenberg SO. Influence of parallel imaging and other reconstruction techniques on the measurement of signal-to-noise ratios. Proceedings from the 13th Annual International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine Meeting. May 7-13; 2005. p. 158. [Miami, FL].
  19. Rauscher A, Barth M, Reichenbach JR, Stollberger R, Moser E. Automated unwrapping of MR phase images applied to BOLD MR- venography at 3 Tesla. J Magn Reson Imaging 2003;18(2):175-80.
  20. Lupo JM, Kelley DAC, Xu D, Vigneron DB, Nelson SJ. Susceptibility- weighted imaging at 3T and 7T using multi-channel phased array coils and SENSE. Proceedings of the 14th Annual Meeting of the International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine. May 8- 12, Seattle, WA; 2006.
  21. Xu Y, Haacke EM. The role of voxel aspect ratio in determining apparent vascular phase behavior in susceptibility weighted imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 2006;24(2):155-60.