Share：
Share this content in WeChat
X
[Chinese][PDF]70371
• Experience Exchanges •
The effect of fast scan parameters on evaluation of T1, T2 relaxation times and proton density of normal brain using synthetic MRI
ZHENG Zuofeng  WANG Zhenchang  YANG Jiafei  ZHANG Dongpo  MA Jun 

Cite this article as: Zheng ZF, Wang ZC, Yang JF, et al. The effect of fast scan parameters on evaluation of T1, T2 relaxation times and proton density of normal brain using synthetic MRI[J]. Chin J Magn Reson Imaging, 2021, 12(12): 62-66. DOI:10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2021.12.012.


[Abstract] Objective To investigate the differences of T1, T2 relaxation times, and proton density (PD) measured from multi-dynamic multi-echo (MDME) sequence between fast scan parameters and standard parameters in healthy individuals using 3.0 T scanner, and evaluate the correlations between these quantitative values. Materials and Methods: Twenty-five healthy volunteers were included in the study. Each of them was scanned 3 times using 3 MDME sequences with different scan parameters (group EME, NOR, and RES) respectively. T1, T2 and PD values were simultaneously measured in each of the 28 regions of interest and were compared among different groups with One-way ANOVA. Values of group RES were set as reference values and linear regression was performed for values of group EME and NOR versus the reference values with Pearson correlation. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software (23.0.0.0, IBM).Results Significant differences were displayed when comparing T1, T2, and PD values among 3 groups in the most of brain regions (P＜0.05). T1 and PD values have lower discrepancy with the highest intergroup coefficient of variations (CVs) of 3.33% and 5.80%, while T2 values has a higher discrepancy with the highest intergroup CV of 6.48%. The linearity in T1, T2, and PD were very strong between group EME and RES (T1, r=0.999; T2, r=0.982; PD, r=0.978) as well as group NOR and RES (T1, r=0.999; T2, r=0.985; PD, r=0.986).Conclusions Quantitative T1, T2 and PD values acquired from MDME sequence can be affected by fast imaging protocols. The bias of measured T1 and PD values are lower than that of T2 values and the linear correlation between them is positive. It is necessary to set a certain scan parameter for comparing or following up cases quantitatively.
[Keywords] synthetic magnetic resonance imaging；T1 relaxation；T2 relaxation；proton density；brain

ZHENG Zuofeng1, 2   WANG Zhenchang1*   YANG Jiafei2   ZHANG Dongpo2   MA Jun2  

1 Department of Radiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100050, China

2 Department of Radiology, Beijing ChuiYangliu Hospital, Beijing 100022, China

Wang ZC, E-mail: cjr.wzhch@vip.163.com

Conflicts of interest   None.

Received  2021-05-08
Accepted  2021-07-12
DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2021.12.012
Cite this article as: Zheng ZF, Wang ZC, Yang JF, et al. The effect of fast scan parameters on evaluation of T1, T2 relaxation times and proton density of normal brain using synthetic MRI[J]. Chin J Magn Reson Imaging, 2021, 12(12): 62-66. DOI:10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2021.12.012.

[1]
Warntjes JB, Leinhard OD, West J, et al. Rapid magnetic resonance quantification on the brain: optimization for clinical usage[J]. Magn Reson Med, 2008, 60(2): 320-329. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.21635.
[2]
Hagiwara A, Hori M, Yokoyama K, et al. Utility of a multiparametric quantitative MRI model that assesses myelin and edema for evaluating plaques, periplaque white matter, and normal-appearing white matter in patients with multiple sclerosis: a feasibility study[J]. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol, 2017, 38(2): 237-242. DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A4977.
[3]
Hagiwara A, Hori M, Suzuki M, et al. Contrast-enhanced synthetic MRI for the detection of brain metastases[J]. Acta Radiol Open, 2016, 5(2): 2058460115626757. DOI: 10.1177/2058460115626757.
[4]
Kang KM, Choi SH, Hwang M, et al. Application of synthetic MRI for direct measurement of magnetic resonance relaxation time and tumor volume at multiple time points after contrast administration: preliminary results in patients with brain metastasis[J]. Korean J Radiol, 2018, 19(4): 783-791. DOI: 10.3348/kjr.2018.19.4.783.
[5]
Hagiwara A, Nakazawa M, Andica C, et al. Dural enhancement in a patient with Sturge-Weber syndrome revealed by double inversion recovery contrast using synthetic MRI[J]. Magn Reson Med Sci, 2016, 15(2): 151-152. DOI: 10.2463/mrms.ci.2015-0066.
[6]
Andica C, Hagiwara A, Nakazawa M, et al. Synthetic MR imaging in the diagnosis of bacterial meningitis[J]. Magn Reson Med Sci, 2017, 16(2): 91-92. DOI: 10.2463/mrms.ci.2016-0082.
[7]
Thomas D, Jean-François B, Laurene N, et al. Synthetic T2 mapping is correlated with time from stroke onset: a future tool in wake-up stroke management?[J]. Eur Radiol, 2019, 29(12): 7019-7026. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-019-06270-0.
[8]
Schmidbauer V, Geisl G, Diogo MC, et al. Validity of SyMRI for Assessment of the Neonatal Brain[J]. Clin Neuroradiol, 2021, 31(2): 315-323. DOI: 10.1007/s00062-020-00894-2.
[9]
Andica C, Hagiwara A, Hori M, et al. Review of synthetic MRI in pediatric brains: Basic principle of MR quantification, its features, clinical applications, and limitations[J]. J Neuroradiol, 2019, 46(4): 268-275. DOI: 10.1016/j.neurad.2019.02.005.
[10]
Ryu KH, Baek HJ, Moon JI, et al. Initial clinical experience of synthetic MRI as a routine neuroimaging protocol in daily practice: a single-center study[J]. J Neuroradiol, 2020, 47(2): 151-160. DOI: 10.1016/j.neurad.2019.03.002.
[11]
West J, Warntjes JB, Lundberg P. Novel whole brain segmentation and volume estimation using quantitative MRI[J]. Eur Radiol, 2012, 22(5): 998-1007. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-011-2336-7.
[12]
Warntjes M, Engström M, Tisell A, et al. Modeling the presence of myelin and edema in the brain based on multi-parametric quantitative MRI[J]. Front Neurol, 2016, 7: 16. DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2016.00016.
[13]
Zheng ZF, Zhang DP, Mao L, et al. Comparative study of image quality between synthetic MRI (MAGIC) and Conventional MRI[J]. Chin J Magn Reson Imaging, 2019, 10(5): 51-55. DOI: 10.12015/issn.1647-8034.2019.05.009.
[14]
Krauss W, Gunnarsson M, Andersson T, et al. Accuracy and reproducibility of a quantitative magnetic resonance imaging method for concurrent measurements of tissue relaxation times and proton density[J]. Magn Reson Imaging, 2015, 33(5): 584-591. DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2015.02.013.
[15]
Hagiwara A, Hori M, Cohen-Adad J, et al. Linearity, bias, intrascanner repeatability, and interscanner reproducibility of quantitative multidynamic multiecho sequence for rapid simultaneous relaxometry at 3 T a validation study with a standardized phantom and healthy controls[J]. Invest Radiol, 2019, 54(1): 39-47. DOI: 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000510.
[16]
Hagiwara A, Warntjes M, Hori M, et al. SyMRI of the brain: rapid quantification of relaxation rates and proton density, with synthetic MRI, automatic brain segmentation, and myelin measurement[J]. Invest Radiol, 2017, 52(10): 647-657. DOI: 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000365.
[17]
Mc Phee KC, Wilman AH. Transverse relaxation and flip angle mapping: evaluation of simultaneous and independent methods using multiple spin echoes[J]. Magn Reson Med, 2017, 77(5): 2057-2065. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.26285.
[18]
Deoni SCL, Peters TM, Rutt BK. High-resolution T1 and T2 mapping of the brain in a clinically acceptable time with DESPOT1 and DESPOT2[J]. Magn Reson Med, 2005, 53(1): 237-241. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.20314.
[19]
Warntjes JBM, Dahlqvist O, Lundberg P. A novel method for rapid,simultaneous T1, T2* and proton density quantification[J]. Magn Reson Med, 2007, 57(3): 528-537. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.21165.
[20]
Kang KM, Choi SH, Kim H, et al. The effect of varying slice thickness and interslice gap on T1 and T2 measured with the multidynamic multiecho sequence[J]. Magn Reson Med Sci, 2019, 18(2): 126-133. DOI: 10.2463/mrms.mp.2018-0010.
[21]
Fujita S, Hagiwara A, Aoki S, et al. Synthetic MRI and MR fingerprinting in routine neuroimaging protocol: what's the next step?[J]. J Neuroradiol, 2020, 47(2): 134-135. DOI: 10.1016/j.neurad.2020.02.001.
[22]
Ryu KH, Choi DS, Baek HJ, et al. Clinical feasibility of 1-min ultrafast brain MRI compared with routine brain MRI using synthetic MRI: a single center pilot study[J]. J Neurol, 2019, 266(2): 431-439. DOI: 10.1007/s00415-018-9149-4.
[23]
Ji S, Yang D, Lee J, et al. Synthetic MRI: technologies and applications in neuroradiology[J]. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2020. [ DOI: ]. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.27440.

PREV Features fusion of brain networks and its application to autism recognition by machine learning based on resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging
NEXT Preliminary study on the application value of 3.0 T magnetic resonance amide proton transfer (APT) imaging in breast diseases
  


LINK


Tel & Fax: +8610-67113815    E-mail: editor@cjmri.cn