Comparison between fast-interrupted steady-state (FISS) and water excitation for fat signal suppression in non-contrast-enhanced free-running whole-heart MRI
Safarkhanlo, Y.; Yerly, J.; Falcao, M. B. L.; Mackowiak, A. L. C.; Piccini, D.; Stuber, M.; Jung, B.; Graeni, C.; Bastiaansen, J. A. M.
Show abstract
BackgroundBalanced steady-state free precession (bSSFP) sequences offer high SNR and excellent tissue contrast for whole-heart MRI. However, inadequate fat suppression can introduce artifacts, particularly with non-Cartesian readouts. This study aimed to compare novel rapid water-excitation (WE) pulses for 3D radial whole-heart free-running MRI at 1.5T, specifically Binomial Off-Resonant Rectangular (BORR), Lipid Insensitive Binomial Off-Resonant RF Excitation (LIBRE), and Lipid Insensitive Binomial Off-Resonant (LIBOR) pulses, alongside a Fast Interrupted Steady-State (FISS) and non-fat suppressed free-running bSSFP sequence. MethodsThree free-running MRI protocols (BORR, LIBRE, LIBOR) were optimized for fat suppression at 1.5T using a phantom. These protocols, along with FISS and non-fat suppressed bSSFP, were tested in phantom and five volunteers, with each acquisition lasting 3min and 41sec. SNR and CNRWater-Fat were measured in phantom data, while SNR and CNRBlood-Myocardium were assessed in volunteers using static gridded reconstructions. Motion-resolved reconstructions were used for qualitative assessments. SAR values were measured for each sequence, and statistical differences were analyzed using one-way ANOVA (p < 0.05). The pulse with the best combination of high SNR and low SAR was identified for further applications. ResultsIn phantom studies, LIBOR had the highest CNRWater-Fat (276.8 {+/-} 2.5), followed by LIBRE (268.1 {+/-} 2.6), BORR (249.9 {+/-} 2.2), and FISS (212.7 {+/-} 2.7), though these differences were not statistically significant (p > 0.05). FISS showed the highest SAR (1.41 W.kg-1), while LIBOR had the lowest (0.23 W.kg-1). In volunteers, BORR had the highest SNR in the ventricular blood pool (17.0 {+/-} 1.5), and LIBRE had the highest CNRBlood-Fat (29.4 {+/-} 9.3). FISS had the highest CNRBlood-Myocardium (29.0 {+/-} 8.9), but the differences were not significant (p > 0.05). LIBOR consistently had the lowest SAR (0.26 W.kg-1). ConclusionThis study compared various fat-signal-suppression approaches in 3D contrast-free whole-heart free-running bSSFP MRI at 1.5T. Although the sequences performed similarly in SNR and CNR, LIBOR offered the lowest SAR, making it a promising candidate for future whole-heart MRI applications, particularly where RF energy deposition is a concern.
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Non-negative least squares computation for in vivo myelin mapping using simulated multi-echo spin-echo T2 decay data 96%
- Gradient scheme optimization for PRESS-localized edited MRS using weighted pathway suppression 95%
- A Phantom System Designed to Assess the Effects of Membrane Lipids on Water Proton Relaxation 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Monitoring mouse brain perfusion with hybrid magnetic resonance optoacoustic tomography 95%
- An evaluation of resonant scanning as a high-speed imaging technique for two-photon imaging of cortical vasculature 89%
- First-in-clinical application of a time-gated diffuse correlation spectroscopy system at 1064nm using superconducting nanowire single photon detectors 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- Analysis of physiological noise in quantitative cardiac magnetic resonance 95%
- Increased brain coverage and efficiency when measuring current-induced magnetic fields by use of simultaneous multi-slice echo-planar MRI 95%
- Acceleration of chemical shift encoding-based water fat MRI for liver proton density fat fraction and T2* mapping using compressed sensing 95%
Similar papers in this journal
"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.