Premium
Split‐acquisition real‐time CINE phase‐contrast MR flow measurements
Author(s) -
Steeden Jennifer A.,
Atkinson David,
Taylor Andrew M.,
Muthurangu Vivek
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
magnetic resonance in medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.696
H-Index - 225
eISSN - 1522-2594
pISSN - 0740-3194
DOI - 10.1002/mrm.22615
Subject(s) - temporal resolution , image resolution , contrast (vision) , artificial intelligence , magnetic resonance imaging , beat (acoustics) , computer science , computer vision , physics , medicine , acoustics , optics , radiology
Abstract The temporal and spatial resolution of real‐time phase‐contrast magnetic resonance (PCMR) is restricted by the need to acquire two interleaved phase images. In this article, we propose a split‐acquisition real‐time CINE PCMR technique, where the acquisition of flow‐encoded and flow‐compensated data is divided into separate blocks. By comparing magnitude images, automatic matching of data in cardio‐respiratory space allows subtraction of background phase offsets. Thus, the data is acquired in real‐time but with phase correction originating from a different heart beat. This effectively doubles the frame rate, allowing either higher temporal or spatial resolution. Two split‐acquisition sequences were tested: one with high‐temporal resolution and one with high‐spatial resolution. Both sequences showed excellent agreement in stroke volumes in 20 adults when validated against cardiac‐gated PCMR and interleaved real‐time PCMR (cardiac gated: 95.2 ± 20.0 mL, interleaved real‐time: 96.2 ± 20.7 mL, high‐temporal resolution: 95.6 ± 20.1 mL, high‐spatial resolution: 95.5 ± 20.4 mL). In six children, the high‐spatial resolution sequence provided more accurate flow measurements than interleaved real‐time PCMR, when compared with cardiac‐gated PCMR (cardiac gated: 20.6 ± 7.6 mL, interleaved real‐time: 24.3 ± 9.2 mL, high‐spatial resolution: 20.8 ± 7.8 mL), due to the increased spatial resolution. The matching technique is shown to be accurate (truth: 94.6 ± 21.8, split‐acquisition: 95.0 ± 21.9 mL) and quantitative image quality (signal‐to‐noise ratio, velocity‐to‐noise ratio and edge sharpness) is acceptable. Magn Reson Med, 2010. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.