A 3D-printed phantom for quality-controlled reproducibility measurements of arterial spin labeled perfusion

PURPOSE

To develop a portable MR perfusion phantom for quality-controlled assessment and reproducibility of arterial spin labeled (ASL) perfusion measurement.

METHODS

A 3D-printed perfusion phantom was developed that mimics the branching of arterial vessels, capillaries, and a chamber containing cellulose sponge representing tissue characteristics. A peristaltic pump circulated distilled water through the phantom, and was first evaluated at 300, 400, and 500 mL/min. Longitudinal reproducibility of perfusion was performed using 2D pseudo-continuous ASL at 20 post-label delays (PLDs, ranging between 0.2 and 7.8 s at 0.4-s intervals) over a period of 16 weeks, with three repetitions each week. Multi-PLD data were fitted into a general kinetic model for perfusion quantification (f) and arterial transit time (ATT). Intraclass correlation coefficient was used to assess intersession reproducibility.

RESULTS

MR perfusion signals acquired in the 3D-printed perfusion phantom agreed well with the experimental conditions, with progressively increasing signal intensities and decreasing ATT for pump flow rates from 300 to 500 mL/min. The perfusion signal at 400 mL/min and the general kinetic model-derived f and ATT maps were similar across all PLDs for both intrasession and intersession reproducibility. Across all 48 experimental time points, the average f was 75.55 ± 3.83 × 10-3  mL/mL/s, the corresponding ATT was 2.10 ± 0.20 s, and the T1 was 1.84 ± 0.102 s. Intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.92 (95% confidence interval 0.83-0.97) for f, 0.96 (0.91-0.99) for ATT, and 0.94 (0.88-0.98) for T1 , demonstrating excellent reproducibility.

CONCLUSION

A simple, portable 3D-printed perfusion phantom with excellent reproducibility of 2D pseudo-continuous ASL measurements was demonstrated that can serve for quality-controlled and reliable measurements of ASL perfusion.

Impact of Temporal Resolution and Methods for Correction on Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Perfusion Quantification

BACKGROUND

Acquisition of magnetic resonance first-pass perfusion images is synchronized to the patient's heart rate (HR) and governs the temporal resolution. This is inherently linked to the process of myocardial blood flow (MBF) quantification and impacts MBF accuracy but to an unclear extent.

PURPOSE

To assess the impact of temporal resolution on quantitative perfusion and compare approaches for accounting for its variability.

STUDY TYPE

Prospective phantom and retrospective clinical study.

POPULATION AND PHANTOM

Simulations, a cardiac perfusion phantom, and 30 patients with (16, 53%) or without (14, 47%) coronary artery disease.

FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE

3.0 T/2D saturation recovery spoiled gradient echo sequence.

ASSESSMENT

Dynamic perfusion data were simulated for a range of reference MBF (1 mL/g/min-5 mL/g/min) and HR (30 bpm-150 bpm). Perfusion imaging was performed in patients and a phantom for different temporal resolutions. MBF and myocardial perfusion reserve (MPR) were quantified without correction for temporal resolution or following correction by either MBF scaling based on the sampling interval or data interpolation prior to quantification. Simulated data were quantified using Fermi deconvolution, truncated singular value decomposition, and one-compartment modeling, whereas phantom and clinical data were quantified using Fermi deconvolution alone.

STATISTICAL TESTS

Shapiro-Wilk tests for normality, percentage error (PE) for measuring MBF accuracy in simulations, and one-way repeated measures analysis of variance with Bonferroni correction to compare clinical MBF and MPR. Statistical significance set at P < 0.05.

RESULTS

For Fermi deconvolution and an example simulated 1 mL/g/min, the MBF PE without correction for temporal resolution was between 55.4% and -62.7% across 30-150 bpm. PE was between -22.2% and -6.8% following MBF scaling and between -14.2% and -14.2% following data interpolation across the same HR. An interpolated HR of 240 bpm reduced PE to ≤10%. Clinical rest and stress MBF and MPR were significantly different between analyses.

DATA CONCLUSION

Accurate perfusion quantification needs to account for the variability of temporal resolution, with data interpolation prior to quantification reducing MBF variability across different resolutions.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3 TECHNICAL EFFICACY STAGE: 1.

Portable perfusion phantom for quantitative DCE-MRI of the abdomen

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to develop a portable perfusion phantom and validate its utility in quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the abdomen.

METHODS

A portable perfusion phantom yielding a reproducible contrast enhancement curve (CEC) was developed. A phantom package including perfusion and static phantoms were imaged simultaneously with each of three healthy human volunteers in two different 3T MR scanners. Look-up tables correlating reference (known) contrast concentrations with measured ones were created using either the static or perfusion phantom. Contrast maps of image slices showing four organs (liver, spleen, pancreas, and paravertebral muscle) were generated before and after data correction using the look-up tables. The contrast concentrations at 4.5 min after dosing in each of the four organs were averaged for each volunteer. The mean contrast concentrations (4 organs × 3 volunteers = 12) were compared for the two scanners, and the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated. Also, the ICC of the mean K^trans values between the two scanners was calculated before and after data correction.

RESULTS

The repeatability coefficient of CECs of perfusion phantom was higher than 0.997 in all measurements. The ICC of the tissue contrast concentrations between the two scanners was 0.693 before correction, but increased to 0.974 after correction using the look-up tables (LUTs) of perfusion phantom. However, the ICC was not increased after correction using static phantom (ICC: 0.617). Similarly, the ICC of the K^trans values was 0.899 before correction, but increased to 0.996 after correction using perfusion phantom LUTs. The ICC of the K^trans values, however, was not increased when static phantom LUTs were used (ICC: 0.866).

CONCLUSIONS

The perfusion phantom reduced variability in quantitating contrast concentration and K^trans values of human abdominal tissues across different MR units, but static phantom did not. The perfusion phantom has the potential to facilitate multi-institutional clinical trials employing quantitative DCE-MRI to evaluate various abdominal malignancies.