A multi-band double-inversion radial fast spin-echo technique for T2 cardiovascular magnetic resonance mapping of the heart

Abdominal T2-Weighted Imaging and T2 Mapping Using a Variable Flip Angle Radial Turbo Spin-Echo Technique

BACKGROUND

T2 mapping is of great interest in abdominal imaging but current methods are limited by low resolution, slice coverage, motion sensitivity, or lengthy acquisitions.

PURPOSE

Develop a radial turbo spin-echo technique with refocusing variable flip angles (RADTSE-VFA) for high spatiotemporal T2 mapping and efficient slice coverage within a breath-hold and compare to the constant flip angle counterpart (RADTSE-CFA).

STUDY TYPE

Prospective technical efficacy.

SUBJECTS

Testing performed on agarose phantoms and 12 patients. Focal liver lesion classification tested on malignant (N = 24) and benign (N = 11) lesions.

FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE

1.5 T/RADTSE-VFA, RADTSE-CFA.

ASSESSMENT

A constrained objective function was used to optimize the refocusing flip angles. Phantom and/or in vivo data were used to assess relative contrast, T2 estimation, specific absorption rate (SAR), and focal liver lesion classification. STATISTICAL TESTS: t-Tests or Mann-Whitney Rank Sum tests were used.

RESULTS

Phantom data did not show significant differences in mean relative contrast (P = 0.10) and T2 accuracy (P = 0.99) between RADTSE-VFA and RADTSE-CFA. Adding noise caused T2 overestimation predominantly for RADTSE-CFA and low T2 values. In vivo results did not show significant differences in mean spleen-to-liver (P = 0.62) and kidney-to-liver (P = 0.49) relative contrast between RADTSE-VFA and RADTSE-CFA. Mean T2 values were not significantly different between the two techniques for spleen (T2VFA  = 109.2 ± 12.3 msec; T2CFA  = 110.7 ± 11.1 msec; P = 0.78) and kidney-medulla (T2VFA  = 113.0 ± 8.7 msec; T2CFA  = 114.0 ± 8.6 msec; P = 0.79). Liver T2 was significantly higher for RADTSE-CFA (T2VFA  = 52.6 ± 6.6 msec; T2CFA  = 60.4 ± 8.0 msec) consistent with T2 overestimation in the phantom study. Focal liver lesion classification had comparable T2 distributions for RADTSE-VFA and RADTSE-CFA for malignancies (P = 1.0) and benign lesions (P = 0.39). RADTSE-VFA had significantly lower SAR than RADTSE-CFA increasing slice coverage by 1.5.

DATA CONCLUSION

RADTSE-VFA provided noise-robust T2 estimation compared to the constant flip angle counterpart while generating T2-weighted images with comparable contrast. The VFA scheme minimized SAR improving slice efficiency for breath-hold imaging.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2 TECHNICAL EFFICACY STAGE: 1.

Autocalibrated cardiac tissue phase mapping with multiband imaging and k-t acceleration

PURPOSE

To develop an autocalibrated multiband (MB) CAIPIRINHA acquisition scheme with in-plane k-t acceleration enabling multislice three-directional tissue phase mapping in one breath-hold.

METHODS

A k-t undersampling scheme was integrated into a time-resolved electrocardiographic-triggered autocalibrated MB gradient-echo sequence. The sequence was used to acquire data on 4 healthy volunteers with MB factors of two (MB2) and three (MB3), which were reconstructed using a joint reconstruction algorithm that tackles both k-t and MB acceleration. Forward simulations of the imaging process were used to tune the reconstruction model hyperparameters. Direct comparisons between MB and single-band tissue phase-mapping measurements were performed.

RESULTS

Simulations showed that the velocities could be accurately reproduced with MB2 k-t (average ± twice the SD of the RMS error of 0.08 ± 0.22 cm/s and velocity peak reduction of 1.03% ± 6.47% compared with fully sampled velocities), whereas acceptable results were obtained with MB3 k-t (RMS error of 0.13 ± 0.58 cm/s and peak reduction of 2.21% ± 13.45%). When applied to tissue phase-mapping data, the proposed technique allowed three-directional velocity encoding to be simultaneously acquired at two/three slices in a single breath-hold of 18 heartbeats. No statistically significant differences were detected between MB2/MB3 k-t and single-band k-t motion traces averaged over the myocardium. Regional differences were found, however, when using the American Heart Association model for segmentation.

CONCLUSION

An autocalibrated MB k-t acquisition/reconstruction framework is presented that allows three-directional velocity encoding of the myocardial velocities at multiple slices in one breath-hold.

Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance: 2017/2018 in review

There were 89 articles published in the Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (JCMR) in 2017, including 76 original research papers, 4 reviews, 5 technical notes, 1 guideline, and 3 corrections. The volume was down slightly from 2017 with a corresponding 15% decrease in manuscript submissions from 405 to 346 and thus reflects a slight increase in the acceptance rate from 25 to 26%. The decrease in submissions for the year followed the initiation of the increased author processing charge (APC) for Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (SCMR) members for manuscripts submitted after June 30, 2018. The quality of the submissions continues to be high. The 2018 JCMR Impact Factor (which is published in June 2019) was slightly lower at 5.1 (vs. 5.46 for 2017; as published in June 2018. The 2018 impact factor means that on average, each JCMR published in 2016 and 2017 was cited 5.1 times in 2018. Our 5 year impact factor was 5.82.In accordance with Open-Access publishing guidelines of BMC, the JCMR articles are published on-line in a continuus fashion in the chronologic order of acceptance, with no collating of the articles into sections or special thematic issues. For this reason, over the years, the Editors have felt that it is useful for the JCMR audience to annually summarize the publications into broad areas of interest or themes, so that readers can view areas of interest in a single article in relation to each other and contemporaneous JCMR publications. In this publication, the manuscripts are presented in broad themes and set in context with related literature and previously published JCMR papers to guide continuity of thought within the journal. In addition, as in the past two years, I have used this publication to also convey information regarding the editorial process and as a "State of our JCMR."This is the 12th year of JCMR as an open-access publication with BMC (formerly known as Biomed Central). The timing of the JCMR transition to the open access platform was "ahead of the curve" and a tribute to the vision of Dr. Matthias Friedrich, the SCMR Publications Committee Chair and Dr. Dudley Pennell, the JCMR editor-in-chief at the time. The open-access system has dramatically increased the reading and citation of JCMR publications and I hope that you, our authors, will continue to send your very best, high quality manuscripts to JCMR for consideration. It takes a village to run a journal and I thank our very dedicated Associate Editors, Guest Editors, Reviewers for their efforts to ensure that the review process occurs in a timely and responsible manner. These efforts have allowed the JCMR to continue as the premier journal of our field. This entire process would also not be possible without the dedication and efforts of our managing editor, Diana Gethers. Finally, I thank you for entrusting me with the editorship of the JCMR as I begin my 4th year as your editor-in-chief. It has been a tremendous experience for me and the opportunity to review manuscripts that reflect the best in our field remains a great joy and highlight of my week!