Premium
Technical Note: The effect of 2D excitation profile on T1 measurement accuracy using the variable flip angle method with an average flip angle assumption
Author(s) -
Svedin Bryant T.,
Parker Dennis L.
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
medical physics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.473
H-Index - 180
eISSN - 2473-4209
pISSN - 0094-2405
DOI - 10.1002/mp.12513
Subject(s) - flip angle , monte carlo method , excitation , range (aeronautics) , sinc function , optics , physics , computational physics , mathematics , materials science , statistics , mathematical analysis , medicine , quantum mechanics , magnetic resonance imaging , composite material , radiology
Purpose To study the accuracy and precision of T 1 estimates using the Variable Flip Angle ( VFA ) method in 2D and 3D acquisitions. Methods Excitation profiles were simulated using numerical implementation of the Bloch equations for Hamming‐windowed sinc excitation pulses with different time‐bandwidth products ( TBP ) of 2, 6, and 10 and for T 1 values of 295 ms and 1045 ms. Experimental data were collected in 5° increments from 5° to 90° for the same T 1 and TBP values. T 1 was calculated for every combination of flip angle with and without a correction for B 1 and slice profile variation. Calculations were also made for flat slice profile such as obtained in 3D acquisition. Monte Carlo simulations were performed to obtain T 1 measurement uncertainty. Results VFA T 1 measurements in 2D without correction can result in a 40–80% underestimation of true T 1 . Flip angle correction can reduce the underestimation, but results in accurate measurements of T 1 only within a narrow band of flip angle combinations. The narrow band of accuracy increases with TBP , but remains too narrow for any practical range of T 1 values or B 1 variation. Simulated noisy VFA T 1 measurements in 3D were accurate as long as the two angles chosen are on either side of the Ernst angle. Conclusions Accurate T1 estimates from VFA 2D acquisitions are possible, but only a narrow range of T1 values within a narrow range of flip angle combinations can be accurately calculated using a 2D slice. Unless a better flip angle correction method is used, these results demonstrate that accurate measurements of T1 in 2D cannot be obtained robustly enough for practical use and are more likely obtained by a thin slab 3D VFA acquisition than from multiple‐slice 2D acquisitions. VFA T 1 measurements in 3D are accurate for wide ranges of flip angle combinations and T 1 values.