4.5 Article

Accelerated Short-TE 3D proton echo-planar spectroscopic Imaging using 2D-SENSE with a 32-channel array coil

期刊

MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICINE
卷 58, 期 6, 页码 1107-1116

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/mrm.21426

关键词

echo-planar spectroscopic imaging; parallel imaging; SENSE; regularization; large array coil

资金

  1. NCRR NIH HHS [P41 RR14075] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIBIB NIH HHS [R01 EB000790-04] Funding Source: Medline
  3. NICHD NIH HHS [R01 HD040712] Funding Source: Medline
  4. NINDS NIH HHS [R01 NS037462] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

MR spectroscopic imaging (MRSI) with whole brain coverage in clinically feasible acquisition times still remains a major challenge. A combination of MRSI with parallel imaging has shown promise to reduce the long encoding times and 2D acceleration with a large array coil is expected to provide high acceleration capability. In this work a very high-speed method for 3D-MRSI based on the combination of proton echo planar spectroscopic imaging (PEPSI) with regularized 2D-SENSE reconstruction is developed. Regularization was performed by constraining the singular value decomposition of the encoding matrix to reduce the effect of low-value and overlapped coil sensitivities. The effects of spectral heterogeneity and discontinuities in coil sensitivity across the spectroscopic voxels were minimized by unaliasing the point spread function. As a result the contamination from extracranial lipids was reduced 1.6-fold on average compared to standard SENSE. We show that the acquisition of short-TE (15 ms) 3D-PEPSI at 3 T with a 32 x 32 x 8 spatial matrix using a 32-channel array coil can be accelerated 8-fold (R = 4 X 2) along y-z to achieve a minimum acquisition time of 1 min. Maps of the concentrations of N-acetyl-aspartate, creatine, choline, and glutamate were obtained with moderate reduction in spatial-spectra quality. The short acquisition time makes the method suitable for volumetric metabolite mapping in clinical studies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据