Image-quality optimization and artifact reduction in fetal magnetic resonance imaging.
Congenital
Fetus
Image optimization
Magnetic resonance imaging
Prenatal
Journal
Pediatric radiology
ISSN: 1432-1998
Titre abrégé: Pediatr Radiol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 0365332
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2020
12 2020
Historique:
received:
25
11
2019
accepted:
31
03
2020
revised:
09
03
2020
entrez:
30
11
2020
pubmed:
1
12
2020
medline:
16
10
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Fetal MRI allows for earlier and better detection of complex congenital anomalies. However, its diagnostic utility is often limited by technical barriers that introduce artifacts and reduce image quality. The main determinants of fetal MR image quality are speed of acquisition, spatial resolution and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). Imaging optimization is a challenge because a change to improve one scan parameter often leads to worsening of another. Moreover, the recent introduction of fetal MRI on 3-tesla (T) scanners to achieve better SNR can amplify some technical issues. Motion, banding artifacts and aliasing artifacts impact the quality of fetal acquisitions at any field strength. High specific absorption rate (SAR) and artifacts from inhomogeneities in the radiofrequency field are important limitations of high-field-strength imaging. We discuss technical barriers that impact image quality and are important limitations to prenatal MRI diagnosis, and propose solutions to improve image quality and reduce artifacts.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33252752
doi: 10.1007/s00247-020-04672-7
pii: 10.1007/s00247-020-04672-7
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1830-1838Références
Prayer D, Malinger G, Brugger PC et al (2017) ISUOG practice guidelines: performance of fetal magnetic resonance imaging. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 49:671–680
pubmed: 28386907
doi: 10.1002/uog.17412
pmcid: 28386907
Platt LD, Barth RA, Pugash D (2018) Current controversies in prenatal diagnosis 3: fetal MRI should be performed in all prenatally detected fetuses with a major structural abnormality. Prenat Diagn 38:166–172
pubmed: 29380869
doi: 10.1002/pd.5219
pmcid: 29380869
Weisstanner C, Gruber GM, Brugger PC et al (2017) Fetal MRI at 3T — ready for routine use? Br J Radiol 90:20160362
pubmed: 27768394
doi: 10.1259/bjr.20160362
pmcid: 27768394
Malamateniou C, Malik SJ, Counsell SJ et al (2013) Motion-compensation techniques in neonatal and fetal MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 34:1124–1136
pubmed: 22576885
doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A3128
pmcid: 22576885
Gholipour A, Estroff JA, Barnewolt CE et al (2014) Fetal MRI: a technical update with educational aspirations. Concepts Magn Reson Part A Bridge Educ Res 43:237–266
doi: 10.1002/cmr.a.21321
Barth MM, Smith MP, Pedrosa I et al (2007) Body MR imaging at 3.0 T: understanding the opportunities and challenges. Radiographics 27:1445–1462
pubmed: 17848702
doi: 10.1148/rg.275065204
pmcid: 17848702
Merkle EM, Dale BM (2006) Abdominal MRI at 3.0 T: the basics revisited. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:1524–1532
pubmed: 16714640
doi: 10.2214/AJR.05.0932
pmcid: 16714640
Gruber B, Froeling M, Leiner T, Klomp DWJ (2018) RF coils: a practical guide for nonphysicists. J Magn Reson Imaging 48:590–604
pmcid: 6175221
doi: 10.1002/jmri.26187
Huang SY, Seethamraju RT, Patel P et al (2015) Body MR imaging: artifacts, k-space, and solutions. Radiographics 35:1439–1460
pubmed: 26207581
pmcid: 4613875
doi: 10.1148/rg.2015140289
Chang KJ, Kamel IR, Macura KJ, Bluemke DA (2008) 3.0-T MR imaging of the abdomen: comparison with 1.5 T. Radiographics 28:1983–1998
pubmed: 19001653
doi: 10.1148/rg.287075154
pmcid: 19001653
Victoria T, Johnson AM, Edgar JC et al (2016) Comparison between 1.5-T and 3-T MRI for fetal imaging: is there an advantage to imaging with a higher field strength? AJR Am J Roentgenol 206:195–201
pubmed: 26700352
doi: 10.2214/AJR.14.14205
pmcid: 26700352
Victoria T, Jaramillo D, Roberts TPL et al (2014) Fetal magnetic resonance imaging: jumping from 1.5 to 3 tesla (preliminary experience). Pediatr Radiol 44:376–386
pubmed: 24671739
doi: 10.1007/s00247-013-2857-0
pmcid: 24671739
Dagia C, Ditchfield M (2008) 3T MRI in paediatrics: challenges and clinical applications. Eur J Radiol 68:309–319
doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.05.019
Priego G, Barrowman NJ, Hurteau-Miller J, Miller E (2017) Does 3T fetal MRI improve image resolution of normal brain structures between 20 and 24 weeks’ gestational age? AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 38:1636–1642
pubmed: 28619840
doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A5251
Jaimes C, Delgado J, Cunnane MB et al (2019) Does 3-T fetal MRI induce adverse acoustic effects in the neonate? A preliminary study comparing postnatal auditory test performance of fetuses scanned at 1.5 and 3 T. Pediatr Radiol 49:37–45
pubmed: 30298210
doi: 10.1007/s00247-018-4261-2
Chartier AL, Bouvier MJ, McPherson DR et al (2019) The safety of maternal and fetal MRI at 3T. AJR Am J Roentgenol 213:1170–1173
pubmed: 31310182
doi: 10.2214/AJR.19.21400
Welsh RC, Nemec U, Thomason ME (2011) Fetal magnetic resonance imaging at 3.0 T. Top Magn Reson Imaging 22:119–131
pubmed: 23558467
doi: 10.1097/RMR.0b013e318267f932
Hand JW, Li Y, Thomas EL et al (2006) Prediction of specific absorption rate in mother and fetus associated with MRI examinations during pregnancy. Magn Reson Med 55:883–893
pubmed: 16508913
doi: 10.1002/mrm.20824
pmcid: 16508913
Tsai LL, Grant AK, Mortele KJ et al (2015) A practical guide to MR imaging safety: what radiologists need to know. Radiographics 35:1722–1737
pubmed: 26466181
doi: 10.1148/rg.2015150108
Alsop DC (1997) The sensitivity of low flip angle RARE imaging. Magn Reson Med 37:176–184
pubmed: 9001140
doi: 10.1002/mrm.1910370206
Hennig J, Scheffler K (2000) Easy improvement of signal-to-noise in RARE-sequences with low refocusing flip angles. Magn Reson Med 44:983–985
pubmed: 11108639
doi: 10.1002/1522-2594(200012)44:6<983::AID-MRM23>3.0.CO;2-8
Guo W-Y, Ono S, Oi S et al (2006) Dynamic motion analysis of fetuses with central nervous system disorders by cine magnetic resonance imaging using fast imaging employing steady-state acquisition and parallel imaging: a preliminary result. J Neurosurg 105:94–100
pubmed: 16922069
pmcid: 16922069
Ohliger MA, Sodickson DK (2006) An introduction to coil array design for parallel MRI. NMR Biomed 19:300–315
pubmed: 16705631
doi: 10.1002/nbm.1046
Parikh PT, Sandhu GS, Blackham KA et al (2011) Evaluation of image quality of a 32-channel versus a 12-channel head coil at 1.5 T for MR imaging of the brain. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 32:365–373
pubmed: 21163877
doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A2297
Keil B, Wald LL (2013) Massively parallel MRI detector arrays. J Magn Reson 229:75–89
pubmed: 23453758
pmcid: 3740730
doi: 10.1016/j.jmr.2013.02.001
Arena L, Morehouse HT, Safir J (1995) MR imaging artifacts that simulate disease: how to recognize and eliminate them. Radiographics 15:1373–1394
pubmed: 8577963
doi: 10.1148/radiographics.15.6.8577963
pmcid: 8577963
da Silva NA, Vassallo J, Sarian LO et al (2018) Magnetic resonance imaging of the fetal brain at 3 tesla: preliminary experience from a single series. Medicine 97:e12602
pubmed: 30290631
pmcid: 6200506
doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000012602
Gholipour A, Estroff JA, Warfield SK (2010) Robust super-resolution volume reconstruction from slice acquisitions: application to fetal brain MRI. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 29:1739–1758
pubmed: 20529730
pmcid: 3694441
doi: 10.1109/TMI.2010.2051680
Pier DB, Gholipour A, Afacan O et al (2016) 3D super-resolution motion-corrected MRI: validation of fetal posterior fossa measurements. J Neuroimaging 26:539–544
pubmed: 26990618
pmcid: 4983257
doi: 10.1111/jon.12342
Velasco-Annis C, Gholipour A, Afacan O et al (2015) Normative biometrics for fetal ocular growth using volumetric MRI reconstruction. Prenat Diagn 35:400–408
pubmed: 25601041
pmcid: 4390455
doi: 10.1002/pd.4558
Gholipour A, Rollins CK, Velasco-Annis C et al (2017) A normative spatiotemporal MRI atlas of the fetal brain for automatic segmentation and analysis of early brain growth. Sci Rep 7:476
pubmed: 28352082
pmcid: 5428658
doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-00525-w
Marami B, Mohseni Salehi SS, Afacan O et al (2017) Temporal slice registration and robust diffusion-tensor reconstruction for improved fetal brain structural connectivity analysis. Neuroimage 156:475–488
pubmed: 28433624
pmcid: 5548611
doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.04.033
Khan S, Vasung L, Marami B et al (2019) Fetal brain growth portrayed by a spatiotemporal diffusion tensor MRI atlas computed from in utero images. Neuroimage 185:593–608
pubmed: 30172006
doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.08.030
pmcid: 30172006
Heiland S (2008) From a as in aliasing to Z as in zipper: artifacts in MRI. Clin Neuroradiol 18:25–36
doi: 10.1007/s00062-008-8003-y
Glenn OA, Barkovich AJ (2006) Magnetic resonance imaging of the fetal brain and spine: an increasingly important tool in prenatal diagnosis, part 1. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 27:1604–1611
pubmed: 16971596
pmcid: 16971596
Scheffler K, Lehnhardt S (2003) Principles and applications of balanced SSFP techniques. Eur Radiol 13:2409–2418
pubmed: 12928954
doi: 10.1007/s00330-003-1957-x
pmcid: 12928954
Hargreaves B (2012) Rapid gradient-echo imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 36:1300–1313
pubmed: 23097185
pmcid: 3502662
doi: 10.1002/jmri.23742
Graves MJ, Mitchell DG (2013) Body MRI artifacts in clinical practice: a physicist’s and radiologist’s perspective. J Magn Reson Imaging 38:269–287
pubmed: 23960007
doi: 10.1002/jmri.24288
Homann H, Graesslin I, Eggers H et al (2012) Local SAR management by RF shimming: a simulation study with multiple human body models. MAGMA 25:193–204
pubmed: 21922191
doi: 10.1007/s10334-011-0281-8
Webb AG (2011) Dielectric materials in magnetic resonance. Concepts Magn Reson 38A:148–184
doi: 10.1002/cmr.a.20219
Childs AS, Malik SJ, O’Regan DP, Hajnal JV (2013) Impact of number of channels on RF shimming at 3T. MAGMA 26:401–410
pubmed: 23315236
pmcid: 3728430
doi: 10.1007/s10334-012-0360-5
Abaci Turk E, Yetisir F, Adalsteinsson E et al (2020) Individual variation in simulated fetal SAR assessed in multiple body models. Magn Reson Med 83:1418–1428
pubmed: 31626373
doi: 10.1002/mrm.28006
Brink WM, Gulani V, Webb AG (2015) Clinical applications of dual-channel transmit MRI: a review. J Magn Reson Imaging 42:855–869
pubmed: 25854179
doi: 10.1002/jmri.24791
Vernickel P, Röschmann P, Findeklee C et al (2007) Eight-channel transmit/receive body MRI coil at 3T. Magn Reson Med 58:381–389
pubmed: 17654592
doi: 10.1002/mrm.21294
Garcia-Polo P, Gagoski B, Guerin B et al (2015) An anthropomorphic MR phantom of the gravid abdomen including the uterus, placenta, fetus and fetal brain. ISMRM Annual Meeting, Toronto
Murbach M, Cabot E, Neufeld E et al (2011) Local SAR enhancements in anatomically correct children and adult models as a function of position within 1.5 T MR body coil. Prog Biophys Mol Biol 107:428–433
pubmed: 21964524
doi: 10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2011.09.017
Murbach M, Neufeld E, Samaras T et al (2017) Pregnant women models analyzed for RF exposure and temperature increase in 3TRF shimmed birdcages: impact of RF shimming on MRI exposure of pregnant women. Magn Reson Med 77:2048–2056
pubmed: 27174499
doi: 10.1002/mrm.26268