A geometric anthropomorphic phantom for quantitative susceptibility mapping: accuracy and repeatability
Hooper, P.; Jin, J.; O'Brien, K.; Barth, M.
Show abstract
Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping (QSM) relies on a tissue's underlying macroscopic geometry to lead to measurable orientation-dependent field perturbations. To understand and assess QSM error in vivo, anthropomorphic phantoms provide a useful model that mimic the electromagnetic properties and morphology of underlying tissue. Herein, we designed and manufactured an MRI compatible anthropomorphic phantom with cylindrical and spheroid compartments containing realistic susceptibilities to mimic hemorrhages, calcifications, and blood vessels. We estimated accuracy ({epsilon}, bias, RMSE) and repeatability (RC) of MEDI-susceptibility measurements within ROIs. We evaluated voxel-based agreement to validate susceptibility mapping under different acquisition conditions (3T versus 7T) and reconstruction algorithms (COSMOS versus MEDI). Reliable MEDI-based susceptibility measurements were obtained from ellipsoids but not from straws. The ellipsoids (|{epsilon}| = 0.007 to 0.083 ppm at 3T; 0.050 to 0.118 ppm at 7T) were more accurate than the straws (|{epsilon}| = 0.084 to 0.190 ppm at 3T; 0.105 to 0.160 ppm at 7T). The repeatability coefficient across all 6 ROIs (RC = 0.652 ppm at 3T; 0.459 ppm at 7T) was substantially larger than across the 4 ellipsoid ROIs only (RC' = 0.168 ppm at 3T; 0.141 ppm at 7T). The accuracy at 3T (bias = -0.002 ppm, RMSE = 0.082 ppm) was better than the accuracy at 7T (bias = -0.056 ppm, RMSE = 0.092 ppm). Using voxels from the 4 ellipsoid ROIs, we observed excellent agreement between COSMOS and MEDI susceptibility maps at 3T, with linear regression of y=1.00x-0.01 (r=0.99). We observed some underestimation of MEDI susceptibility maps relative to COSMOS at 7T, with linear regression and y=0.93x-0.04 (r=0.99). The results imply that QSM reconstructions are reliable with 3T scanners but can be challenging with 7T scanners at high magnetic susceptibilities.
Matching journals
The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- A Numerical Alternative to MR Thermometry for Safety Validation of Multi-Channel RF Transmit Coils 96%
- Mesoscopic whole-brain T2*-weighted and associated quantitative MRI in healthy humans at 10.5 T 96%
- Multi-center benchmarking of cervical spinal cord RF coils for 7 T MRI: A traveling spines study 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- A Phantom System Designed to Assess the Effects of Membrane Lipids on Water Proton Relaxation 95%
- Hierarchical Bayesian Modelling Improves Microstructural Parameter Mapping in Diffusion and Exchange MRI Data 94%
- Non-negative least squares computation for in vivo myelin mapping using simulated multi-echo spin-echo T2 decay data 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- APART-QSM: an improved sub-voxel quantitative susceptibility mapping for susceptibility source separation using an iterative data fitting method 95%
- On the Reconstruction of Magnetic ResonanceCurrent Density Images of the Human Brain:Pitfalls and Perspectives 95%
- Increased Sensitivity and Signal-to-Noise Ratio in Diffusion-Weighted MRI using Multi-Echo Acquisitions 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Temporal signal-to-noise changes in combined multiband- and slice-accelerated echo-planar imaging with a 20- and 64-channel coil 95%
- Non-Invasive Perfusion MR Imaging of the Human Brain via Breath-Holding 94%
- Improved 7 Tesla Transmit Field Homogeneity with Reduced Electromagnetic Power Deposition Using Coupled Tic Tac Toe Antennas 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Multi-modal Monte Carlo MRI simulator of tissue microstructure 95%
- Visual stimulus-evoked blood velocity responses in individual human posterior cerebral arteries measured with dynamic phase-contrast functional MR angiography 93%
- Framewise multi-echo distortion correction for superior functional MRI 93%
"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.