Back

Rapid submillimeter QSM and R2* mapping using interleaved multi-shot 3D-EPI at 7 and 3 Tesla

Stirnberg, R.; Deistung, A.; Reichenbach, J. R.; Breteler, M. M. B.; Stöcker, T.

2023-12-30 radiology and imaging
10.1101/2023.12.29.23300637 medRxiv
Show abstract

PurposeTo explore the high signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) efficiency of interleaved multi-shot 3D-EPI for fast and robust high-resolution whole-brain quantitative susceptibility (QSM) and [Formula] mapping at 7T and 3T. MethodsSingle- and multi-TE segmented 3D-EPI is combined with conventional CAIPIRINHA undersampling for up to 72-fold effective gradient echo (GRE) imaging acceleration. Across multiple averages, scan parameters are varied (e.g. dual-polarity frequency-encoding) to additionally correct for B0-induced artifacts, geometric distortions and motion retrospectively. A comparison to established GRE protocols is made. Resolutions range from 1.4mm isotropic (1 multi-TE average in 36s) up to 0.4mm isotropic (2 single-TE averages in approximately 6 minutes) with whole-head coverage. ResultsOnly 1-4 averages are needed for sufficient SNR with 3D-EPI, depending on resolution and field strength. Fast scanning and small voxels together with retrospective corrections result in substantially reduced image artifacts, which improves susceptibility and [Formula] mapping. Additionally, much finer details are obtained in susceptibility-weighted image projections through significantly reduced partial voluming. ConclusionUsing interleaved multi-shot 3D-EPI, single-TE and multi-TE data can readily be acquired 10 times faster than with conventional, accelerated GRE imaging. Even 0.4mm isotropic whole-head QSM within 6 minutes becomes feasible at 7T. At 3T, motion-robust and distortion-free 0.8mm isotropic whole-brain QSM and [Formula] mapping in less than 7 minutes becomes clinically feasible. Stronger gradient systems may allow for even higher effective acceleration rates through larger EPI factors while maintaining optimal contrast.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.