Optimizing pseudo-spiral sampling for abdominal DCE MRI using a digital anthropomorphic phantom.
digital phantom
dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI
extended Tofts model
k‐space sampling patterns
pancreatic cancer
perfusion
Journal
Magnetic resonance in medicine
ISSN: 1522-2594
Titre abrégé: Magn Reson Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8505245
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
14 Jul 2024
14 Jul 2024
Historique:
revised:
18
06
2024
received:
20
12
2023
accepted:
20
06
2024
medline:
15
7
2024
pubmed:
15
7
2024
entrez:
15
7
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
For reliable DCE MRI parameter estimation, k-space undersampling is essential to meet resolution, coverage, and signal-to-noise requirements. Pseudo-spiral (PS) sampling achieves this by sampling k-space on a Cartesian grid following a spiral trajectory. The goal was to optimize PS k-space sampling patterns for abdomin al DCE MRI. The optimal PS k-space sampling pattern was determined using an anthropomorphic digital phantom. Contrast agent inflow was simulated in the liver, spleen, pancreas, and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). A total of 704 variable sampling and reconstruction approaches were created using three algorithms using different parametrizations to control sampling density, halfscan and compressed sensing regularization. The sampling patterns were evaluated based on image quality scores and the accuracy and precision of the DCE pharmacokinetic parameters. The best and worst strategies were assessed in vivo in five healthy volunteers without contrast agent administration. The best strategy was tested in a DCE scan of a PDAC patient. The best PS reconstruction was found to be PS-diffuse based, with quadratic distribution of readouts on a spiral, without random shuffling, halfscan factor of 0.8, and total variation regularization of 0.05 in the spatial and temporal domains. The best scoring strategy showed sharper images with less prominent artifacts in healthy volunteers compared to the worst strategy. Our suggested DCE sampling strategy also showed high quality DCE images in the PDAC patient. Using an anthropomorphic digital phantom, we identified an optimal PS sampling strategy for abdominal DCE MRI, and demonstrated feasibility in a PDAC patient.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : KWF Kankerbestrijding
ID : 10698
Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Author(s). Magnetic Resonance in Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine.
Références
Stopa KB, Kusiak AA, Szopa MD, Ferdek PE, Jakubowska MA. Pancreatic cancer and its microenvironment‐recent advances and current controversies. Int J Mol Sci. 2020;21:3218.
Klaassen R, Steins A, Gurney‐Champion OJ, et al. Pathological validation and prognostic potential of quantitative MRI in the characterization of pancreas cancer: preliminary experience. Mol Oncol. 2020;14:2176‐2189.
Li J, Yan L‐l, Zhang H‐k, et al. Dynamic contrast‐enhanced and diffusion‐weighted MR imaging in early prediction of pathologic response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced gastric cancer. Abdominal Radiol. 2022;47:3394‐3405.
Tang W, Liu W, Li H‐M, et al. Quantitative dynamic contrast‐enhanced MR imaging for the preliminary prediction of the response to gemcitabine‐based chemotherapy in advanced pancreatic ductal carcinoma. Eur J Radiol. 2019;121:108734.
Madhuranthakam AJ, Yuan Q, Pedrosa I. Quantitative methods in abdominal MRI: perfusion imaging. Top Magn Reson Imaging. 2017;26:251‐258.
Tofts PS, Brix G, Buckley DL, et al. Estimating kinetic parameters from dynamic contrast‐enhanced T1‐weighted MRI of a diffusable tracer: standardized quantities and symbols. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1999;10:223‐232.
Shukla‐Dave A, Obuchowski NA, Chenevert TL, et al. Quantitative imaging biomarkers alliance (QIBA) recommendations for improved precision of DWI and DCE‐MRI derived biomarkers in multicenter oncology trials. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2019;49:e101‐e121.
Bliesener Y, Lingala SG, Haldar JP, Nayak KS. Impact of (k,t) sampling on DCE MRI tracer kinetic parameter estimation in digital reference objects. Magn Reson Med. 2020;83:1625‐1639.
Feng L, Grimm R, Block KT, et al. Golden‐angle radial sparse parallel MRI: combination of compressed sensing, parallel imaging, and golden‐angle radial sampling for fast and flexible dynamic volumetric MRI. Magn Reson Med. 2014;72:707‐717.
Seo N, Park SJ, Kim B, et al. Feasibility of free‐breathing dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI of the abdomen: a comparison between CAIPIRINHAVIBE, radial‐VIBE with KWIC reconstruction and conventional VIBE. Brit J Radiol. 2016;89:20160150.
Stokes AM, Ragunathan S, Robison RK, et al. Development of a spiral spin‐ and gradient‐echo (spiral‐SAGE) approach for improved multi‐parametric dynamic contrast neuroimaging. Magn Reson Med. 2021;86:3082‐3095.
Feng L. Golden‐angle radial MRI: basics, advances, and applications. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2022;56:45‐62.
Seiberlich N, Gulani V, Campbell‐Washburn A, et al. Quantitative Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Elsevier Science; 2020:131.
Wright KL, Hamilton JI, Griswold MA, Gulani V, Seiberlich N. Non‐Cartesian parallel imaging reconstruction. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2014;40:1022‐1040.
Gottwald LM, Peper ES, Zhang Q, et al. Pseudo‐spiral sampling and compressed sensing reconstruction provides flexibility of temporal resolution in accelerated aortic 4D flow MRI: a comparison with k‐t principal component analysis. NMR Biomed. 2020;33:e4255.
Han F, Zhou Z, Han E, et al. Self‐gated 4D multiphase, steady‐state imaging with contrast enhancement (MUSIC) using rotating cartesian K‐space (ROCK): validation in children with congenital heart disease. Magn Reson Med. 2017;78:472‐483.
Prieto C, Doneva M, Usman M, et al. Highly efficient respiratory motion compensated free‐breathing coronary mra using golden‐step Cartesian acquisition. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2015;41:738‐746.
Usman M, Ruijsink B, Nazir MS, Cruz G, Prieto C. Free breathing whole‐heart 3D CINE MRI with self‐gated Cartesian trajectory. Magn Reson Imaging. 2017;38:129‐137.
Zhang T, Cheng JY, Potnick AG, et al. Fast pediatric 3D free‐breathing abdominal dynamic contrast enhanced MRI with high spatiotemporal resolution. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2015;41:460‐473.
Do C, DeAguero J, Brearley A, et al. Gadolinium‐based contrast agent use, their safety, and practice evolution. Kidney360. 2020;1:561‐568.
Segars WP, Sturgeon G, Mendonca S, Grimes J, Tsui BM. 4D XCAT phantom for multimodality imaging research. Med Phys. 2010;37:4902‐4915.
Wissmann L, Santelli C, Segars WP, Kozerke S. MRXCAT: realistic numerical phantoms for cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2014;16:63.
Hasgall PA, Baumgartner C, Neufeld E, et al. IT'IS database for thermal and electromagnetic parameters of biological tissues. 22‐2‐2022 ed. Volume 4.1. https://itis.swiss/virtual‐population/tissue‐properties/2022
Holland MD, Morales A, Simmons S, et al. Disposable point‐of‐care portable perfusion phantom for quantitative DCE‐MRI. Med Phys. 2022;49:271‐281.
Klaassen R, Gurney‐Champion OJ, Wilmink JW, et al. Repeatability and correlations of dynamic contrast enhanced and T2* MRI in patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Magn Reson Imaging. 2018;50:1‐9.
Orton MR, d'Arcy JA, Walker‐Samuel S, et al. Computationally efficient vascular input function models for quantitative kinetic modelling using DCE‐MRI. Phys Med Biol. 2008;53:1225‐1239.
Uecker M, Ong F, Tamir JL. Berkeley advanced reconstruction toolbox. Proc Intl Soc Mag Reson Med. 2015;23:2486.
Zhou W, Bovik AC, Sheikh HR, Simoncelli EP. Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity. IEEE Trans Image Process. 2004;13:600‐612.
Team Rc. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. 2020.
Atkinson D, Hill DL, Stoyle PN, Summers PE, Keevil SF. Automatic correction of motion artifacts in magnetic resonance images using an entropy focus criterion. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 1997;16:903‐910.
van Houdt PJ, Ragunathan S, Berks M, et al. Contrast‐agent‐based perfusion MRI code repository and testing framework: ISMRM Open Science Initiative for Perfusion Imaging (OSIPI). Magn Reson Med. 2024;91:1774‐1786.
Wennen M, Moll M, Marcus T, Kuijer J, Heunks L, Lavini C, Strijkers G, Nederveen A, Gurney‐Champion O. A Model for Fat‐Suppressed Variable Flip Angle T1‐Mapping and Dynamic Contrast Enhanced MRI. Abstract ISMRM. 2022.
Kim H, Morgan DE, Schexnailder P, et al. Accurate therapeutic response assessment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma using quantitative dynamic contrast‐enhanced magnetic resonance imaging with a point‐of‐care perfusion phantom: a pilot study. Invest Radiol. 2019;54:16‐22.
Zissen MH, Wang ZJ, Yee J, Aslam R, Monto A, Yeh BM. Contrast‐enhanced CT quantification of the hepatic fractional extracellular space: correlation with diffuse liver disease severity. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;201:1204‐1210.
Bandula S, Banypersad SM, Sado D, et al. Measurement of tissue interstitial volume in healthy patients and those with amyloidosis with equilibrium contrast‐enhanced MR imaging. Radiology. 2013;268:858‐864.
Lee SH, Hayano K, Zhu AX, Sahani DV, Yoshida H. Dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI kinetic parameters as prognostic biomarkers for prediction of survival of patient with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a pilot comparative study. Acad Radiol. 2015;22:1344‐1360.