Cargando…
Efficiency analysis for quantitative MRI of T1 and T2 relaxometry methods
This study presents a comparison of quantitative MRI methods based on an efficiency metric that quantifies their intrinsic ability to extract information about tissue parameters. Under a regime of unbiased parameter estimates, an intrinsic efficiency metric [Formula: see text] was derived for fully-...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
IOP Publishing
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8312556/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34192676 http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/ac101f |
_version_ | 1783729168790323200 |
---|---|
author | Leitão, David Teixeira, Rui Pedro A. G. Price, Anthony Uus, Alena Hajnal, Joseph V. Malik, Shaihan J. |
author_facet | Leitão, David Teixeira, Rui Pedro A. G. Price, Anthony Uus, Alena Hajnal, Joseph V. Malik, Shaihan J. |
author_sort | Leitão, David |
collection | PubMed |
description | This study presents a comparison of quantitative MRI methods based on an efficiency metric that quantifies their intrinsic ability to extract information about tissue parameters. Under a regime of unbiased parameter estimates, an intrinsic efficiency metric [Formula: see text] was derived for fully-sampled experiments which can be used to both optimize and compare sequences. Here we optimize and compare several steady-state and transient gradient-echo based qMRI methods, such as magnetic resonance fingerprinting (MRF), for joint [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] mapping. The impact of undersampling was also evaluated, assuming incoherent aliasing that is treated as noise by parameter estimation. In vivo validation of the efficiency metric was also performed. Transient methods such as MRF can be up to 3.5 times more efficient than steady-state methods, when spatial undersampling is ignored. If incoherent aliasing is treated as noise during least-squares parameter estimation, the efficiency is reduced in proportion to the SNR of the data, with reduction factors of 5 often seen for practical SNR levels. In vivo validation showed a very good agreement between the theoretical and experimentally predicted efficiency. This work presents and validates an efficiency metric to optimize and compare the performance of qMRI methods. Transient methods were found to be intrinsically more efficient than steady-state methods, however the effect of spatial undersampling can significantly erode this advantage. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8312556 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | IOP Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-83125562021-07-27 Efficiency analysis for quantitative MRI of T1 and T2 relaxometry methods Leitão, David Teixeira, Rui Pedro A. G. Price, Anthony Uus, Alena Hajnal, Joseph V. Malik, Shaihan J. Phys Med Biol Note This study presents a comparison of quantitative MRI methods based on an efficiency metric that quantifies their intrinsic ability to extract information about tissue parameters. Under a regime of unbiased parameter estimates, an intrinsic efficiency metric [Formula: see text] was derived for fully-sampled experiments which can be used to both optimize and compare sequences. Here we optimize and compare several steady-state and transient gradient-echo based qMRI methods, such as magnetic resonance fingerprinting (MRF), for joint [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] mapping. The impact of undersampling was also evaluated, assuming incoherent aliasing that is treated as noise by parameter estimation. In vivo validation of the efficiency metric was also performed. Transient methods such as MRF can be up to 3.5 times more efficient than steady-state methods, when spatial undersampling is ignored. If incoherent aliasing is treated as noise during least-squares parameter estimation, the efficiency is reduced in proportion to the SNR of the data, with reduction factors of 5 often seen for practical SNR levels. In vivo validation showed a very good agreement between the theoretical and experimentally predicted efficiency. This work presents and validates an efficiency metric to optimize and compare the performance of qMRI methods. Transient methods were found to be intrinsically more efficient than steady-state methods, however the effect of spatial undersampling can significantly erode this advantage. IOP Publishing 2021-08-07 2021-07-26 /pmc/articles/PMC8312556/ /pubmed/34192676 http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/ac101f Text en © 2021 Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Original content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . Any further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI. |
spellingShingle | Note Leitão, David Teixeira, Rui Pedro A. G. Price, Anthony Uus, Alena Hajnal, Joseph V. Malik, Shaihan J. Efficiency analysis for quantitative MRI of T1 and T2 relaxometry methods |
title | Efficiency analysis for quantitative MRI of T1 and T2 relaxometry methods |
title_full | Efficiency analysis for quantitative MRI of T1 and T2 relaxometry methods |
title_fullStr | Efficiency analysis for quantitative MRI of T1 and T2 relaxometry methods |
title_full_unstemmed | Efficiency analysis for quantitative MRI of T1 and T2 relaxometry methods |
title_short | Efficiency analysis for quantitative MRI of T1 and T2 relaxometry methods |
title_sort | efficiency analysis for quantitative mri of t1 and t2 relaxometry methods |
topic | Note |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8312556/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34192676 http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/ac101f |
work_keys_str_mv | AT leitaodavid efficiencyanalysisforquantitativemrioft1andt2relaxometrymethods AT teixeiraruipedroag efficiencyanalysisforquantitativemrioft1andt2relaxometrymethods AT priceanthony efficiencyanalysisforquantitativemrioft1andt2relaxometrymethods AT uusalena efficiencyanalysisforquantitativemrioft1andt2relaxometrymethods AT hajnaljosephv efficiencyanalysisforquantitativemrioft1andt2relaxometrymethods AT malikshaihanj efficiencyanalysisforquantitativemrioft1andt2relaxometrymethods |