Pipe, James G

Abstract Purpose To demonstrate T 2 ‐weighted (single‐echo) spin‐echo (SE) imaging with near‐optimal acquisition efficiency by applying SNR‐efficient RF slice encoding and spiral readout. Methods A quadratic‐phase (frequency swept) excitation RF pulse replaced the conventional excitation in T 2 ‐weighted SE sequence to excite a thick slab that is internally spatially encoded by a variable phase along the slice direction. Highly overlapping slabs centered at every desired slice location were acquired in multiple passes, such that the entire imaging volume was excited by contiguous slabs in any given pass. Following 90° excitation, each slab was refocused with a conventional 180° RF to produce a SE signal, followed by a spiral in‐out readout. A noise‐insensitive reconstruction removed the quadratic phase in the spatial frequency domain, yielding desired slice resolution and improved SNR. Results Increasing the RF frequency sweep (hence, excitation width) allowed more frequent encoding of each slice over the multiple passes, improving final image SNR, until crosstalk ensued at excessive slab widths compared to their center‐to‐center spacing. With an optimized slab width, the proposed technique used all passes to acquire every prescribed slice, with substantially improved SNR over conventional SE or 2D‐turbo‐spin‐echo (TSE) scans. Quantitative SNR measurements indicated similar SNR as 3D‐TSE, but radiologist scoring favored 3D‐TSE, mainly because of spiral‐related artifacts and possibly because of regularized reconstructions in 3D‐TSE. Conclusion Using SNR‐efficient slice excitation scheme and spiral readout helped eliminate SNR and temporal inefficiencies in conventional T 2 ‐weighted imaging, yielding SNR independent of TR or number of passes.

Abstract Purpose This work proposes a 2D/3D hybrid inflow MRA technique for fast scanning and high SNR and contrast‐to‐noise (CNR) efficiencies. Methods Localized quadratic (LQ) encoding was combined with a sliding‐slice spiral acquisition. Inflow MRAs around the circle of Willis and the carotid bifurcations were collected on four healthy volunteers. Spiral images were deblurred without or with water–fat separation for sliding‐slice LQ (ssLQ) out‐of‐phase (OP) and Dixon inflow MRAs, respectively. Results were compared to multiple overlapping thin slab acquisitions (MOTSA) and 2D OP inflow MRAs. Noise data were also acquired with RF and gradients turned off to compute maps of SNR and SNR efficiency. Quantitative assessment of relative contrast, CNR, and CNR efficiency for flow were performed in regions of interest. Results The sliding‐slice spiral technique alone reduces scan time by 10% to 40% compared with a standard spiral acquisition scheme. The proposed spiral ssLQ OP achieves 50% higher scan speed than the spiral MOTSA with comparable SNR and CNR efficiencies, which are ∼100% higher than the Cartesian MOTSA for intracranial inflow MRAs. Spiral ssLQ Dixon inflow MRA provides better visibility for vessels around the fat compared to spiral ssLQ OP inflow MRA, with a trade‐off of scan speed. Spiral ssLQ MRA with thinner slice thickness is two to five times faster than the 2D Cartesian inflow neck MRA around the carotid bifurcations, while also achieving higher SNR efficiency. Conclusion The proposed spiral ssLQ is a fast and flexible MRA method with improved SNR and CNR efficiencies over traditional Cartesian inflow MRAs.

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to develop a spiral‐based combined spin‐ and gradient‐echo (spiral‐SAGE) method for simultaneous dynamic contrast‐enhanced (DCE‐MRI) and dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI (DSC‐MRI).MethodsUsing this sequence, we obtained gradient‐echo TEs of 1.69 and 26 ms, a SE TE of 87.72 ms, with a TR of 1663 ms. Using an iterative SENSE reconstruction followed by deblurring, spiral‐induced image artifacts were minimized. Healthy volunteer images are shown to demonstrate image quality using the optimized reconstruction, as well as for comparison with EPI‐based SAGE. A bioreactor phantom was used to compare dynamic‐contrast time courses with both spiral‐SAGE and EPI‐SAGE. A proof‐of‐concept cohort of patients with brain tumors shows the range of hemodynamic maps available using spiral‐SAGE.ResultsComparison of spiral‐SAGE images with conventional EPI‐SAGE images illustrates substantial reductions of image distortion and artifactual image intensity variations. Bioreactor phantom data show similar dynamic contrast time courses between standard EPI‐SAGE and spiral‐SAGE for the second and third echoes, whereas first‐echo data show improvements in quantifying T1 changes with shorter echo times. In a cohort of patients with brain tumors, spiral‐SAGE–based perfusion and permeability maps are shown with comparison with the standard single‐echo EPI perfusion map.ConclusionSpiral‐SAGE provides a substantial improvement for the assessment of perfusion and permeability by mitigating artifacts typically encountered with EPI and by providing a shorter echo time for improved characterization of permeability. Spiral‐SAGE enables quantification of perfusion, permeability, and vessel architectural parameters, as demonstrated in brain tumors.