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-...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Leitão, David, Teixeira, Rui Pedro A. G., Price, Anthony, Uus, Alena, Hajnal, Joseph V., Malik, Shaihan J.
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