4.5 Article

Undersampled elliptical centric view-order for improved spatial resolution in contrast-enhanced MR angiography

期刊

MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICINE
卷 55, 期 1, 页码 50-58

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/mrm.20726

关键词

elliptical-centric; projection reconstruction; partial Fourier; 2D homodyne; MR angiography

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [HL70620] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIBIB NIH HHS [EB00212, EB04281] Funding Source: Medline
  3. NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE [R01HL070620, R56HL070620] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  4. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF BIOMEDICAL IMAGING AND BIOENGINEERING [R01EB000212, R33EB004281] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although contrast-enhanced MR angiography (CE-MRA) has been successfully developed into a routine clinical imaging technique, there is still need for improved spatial resolution in a given acquisition time. Undersampled projection reconstruction (PR) techniques maintain spatial resolution with reduced scan times, and the elliptical centric (EC) view order provides high quality arterial phase images without venous contamination. In this work, we present a hybrid elliptical centric-projection reconstruction (EC-PR) technique to provide spatial resolution improvement over standard EC in a given time. The k-space sampling was performed by undersampling the periphery of the k(Y)-k(Z) phase encoding plane of an EC view order in a PR like manner. The sampled views were maintained on a rectilinear grid, and thus reconstructed by standard 3DFT. The non-sampled views were compensated either by zero-filling or performing a 2D homodyne reconstruction. Compared to a fully sampled k-space, the EC-PR sequence acquired in the same scan time provides a resolution improvement of about two, as shown by point spread function analysis and phantom experiments. The hypothesis that EC-PR provides improved resolution while retaining diagnostically adequate SNR was tested in 11 CEMRA studies of the popliteal and carotid arteries and shown to be true (P < 0.03).

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