Premium
Fast susceptibility‐weighted imaging with three‐dimensional short‐axis propeller (SAP)‐echo‐planar imaging
Author(s) -
Holdsworth Samantha J.,
Yeom Kristen W.,
Moseley Michael E.,
Skare S.
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
journal of magnetic resonance imaging
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.563
H-Index - 160
eISSN - 1522-2586
pISSN - 1053-1807
DOI - 10.1002/jmri.24675
Subject(s) - echo planar imaging , propeller , echo (communications protocol) , planar , magnetic resonance imaging , nuclear magnetic resonance , medicine , physics , radiology , geology , computer science , oceanography , computer network , computer graphics (images)
Background Susceptibility‐weighted imaging (SWI) in neuroimaging can be challenging due to long scan times of three‐dimensional (3D) gradient recalled echo (GRE), while faster techniques such as 3D interleaved echo‐planar imaging (iEPI) are prone to motion artifacts. Here we outline and implement a 3D short‐axis propeller echo‐planar imaging (SAP‐EPI) trajectory as a faster, motion‐correctable approach for SWI. Methods Experiments were conducted on a 3T MRI system. The 3D SAP‐EPI, 3D iEPI, and 3D GRE SWI scans were acquired on two volunteers. Controlled motion experiments were conducted to test the motion‐correction capability of 3D SAP‐EPI. The 3D SAP‐EPI SWI data were acquired on two pediatric patients as a potential alternative to 2D GRE used clinically. Results The 3D GRE images had a better target resolution (0.47 × 0.94 × 2 mm, scan time = 5 min), iEPI and SAP‐EPI images (resolution = 0.94 × 0.94 × 2 mm) were acquired in a faster scan time (1:52 min) with twice the brain coverage. SAP‐EPI showed motion‐correction capability and some immunity to undersampling from rejected data. Conclusion While 3D SAP‐EPI suffers from some geometric distortion, its short scan time and motion‐correction capability suggest that SAP‐EPI may be a useful alternative to GRE and iEPI for use in SWI, particularly in uncooperative patients. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2015;41:1447–1453. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.