4.7 Article

Quantitative susceptibility mapping for investigating subtle susceptibility variations in the human brain

Journal

NEUROIMAGE
Volume 62, Issue 3, Pages 2083-2100

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.05.067

Keywords

Magnetic susceptibility mapping; Tissue susceptibility; Phase imaging; Homogeneity Enabled Incremental Dipole Inversion; COSMOS

Funding

  1. Carl Zeiss Foundation
  2. German Research Foundation (DFG) [RE 1123/9-2]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) is a novel magnetic resonance-based technique that determines tissue magnetic susceptibility from measurements of the magnetic field perturbation. Due to the ill-posed nature of this problem, regularization strategies are generally required to reduce streaking artifacts on the computed maps. The present study introduces a new algorithm for calculating the susceptibility distribution utilizing a priori information on its regional homogeneity derived from gradient echo phase images and analyzes the impact of erroneous a priori information on susceptibility map fidelity. The algorithm, Homogeneity Enabled Incremental Dipole Inversion (HEIDI), was investigated with a special focus on the reconstruction of subtle susceptibility variations in a numerical model and in volunteer data and was compared with two recently published approaches, Thresholded K-space Division (TKD) and Morphology Enabled Dipole Inversion (MEDI). HEIDI resulted in susceptibility maps without streaking artifacts and excellent depiction of subtle susceptibility variations in most regions. By investigating HEIDI susceptibility maps acquired with the volunteers' heads in different orientations, it was demonstrated that the apparent magnetic susceptibility distribution of human brain tissue considerably depends on the direction of the main magnetic field. (C) 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available