DeMarco, J. Kevin

PurposeWe investigate the importance of high gradient‐amplitude and high slew‐rate on oscillating gradient spin echo (OGSE) diffusion imaging for human brain imaging and evaluate human brain imaging with OGSE on the MAGNUS head‐gradient insert (200 mT/m amplitude and 500 T/m/s slew rate).MethodsSimulations with cosine‐modulated and trapezoidal‐cosine OGSE at various gradient amplitudes and slew rates were performed. Six healthy subjects were imaged with the MAGNUS gradient at 3T with OGSE at frequencies up to 100 Hz and b = 450 s/mm2. Comparisons were made against standard pulsed gradient spin echo (PGSE) diffusion in vivo and in an isotropic diffusion phantom.ResultsSimulations show that to achieve high frequency and b‐value simultaneously for OGSE, high gradient amplitude, high slew rates, and high peripheral nerve stimulation limits are required. A strong linear trend for increased diffusivity (mean: 8–19%, radial: 9–27%, parallel: 8–15%) was observed in normal white matter with OGSE (20 Hz to 100 Hz) as compared to PGSE. Linear fitting to frequency provided excellent correlation, and using a short‐range disorder model provided radial long‐term diffusivities of D∞,MD = 911 ± 72 µm2/s, D∞,PD = 1519 ± 164 µm2/s, and D∞,RD = 640 ± 111 µm2/s and correlation lengths of lc,MD = 0.802 ± 0.156 µm, lc,PD = 0.837 ± 0.172 µm, and lc,RD = 0.780 ± 0.174 µm. Diffusivity changes with OGSE frequency were negligible in the phantom, as expected.ConclusionThe high gradient amplitude, high slew rate, and high peripheral nerve stimulation thresholds of the MAGNUS head‐gradient enables OGSE acquisition for in vivo human brain imaging.

BackgroundCarotid plaque imaging with MRI is becoming more commonplace, but practical challenges exist in performing plaque imaging with surface coils.PurposeTo compare the diagnostic performance of a carotid plaque MRI protocol using a standard neurovascular coil (Neurovascular Coil Protocol) to a higher‐resolution carotid plaque MRI using carotid surface coils (Surface Coil Protocol) in characterizing carotid plaque.Study TypeProspective study comparing two MR techniques in plaque characterization.PopulationThirty‐eight consecutive carotid artery disease patients.Field Strength/SequencePatients underwent 3T MRI using 1) a Neurovascular Coil Protocol including the following sequences: 3D‐FSE T1 pre/postcontrast and precontrast 3D IR‐FSPGR, and 2) a Surface Coil Protocol using standard multicontrast MRI sequences.AssessmentPlaque characteristics analyzed by two independent neuroradiologists included intraplaque hemorrhage (IPH), lipid‐rich necrotic‐core (LRNC), and thin/ruptured fibrous cap (TRFC).Statistical TestsDiagnostic performance of the Neurovascular Coil Protocol was compared to the Surface Coil Protocol reference standard using receiver‐operating curves.ResultsFor IPH, sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) of the Neurovascular Coil Protocol were 91.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 78.8–97.5%), 87.0% (95% CI = 66.4–97.2%), and 0.92, respectively. For LRNC without IPH sensitivity, specificity, and AUC were 73.3% (95% CI = 44.9–92.2%), 85.7% (95% CI = 67.3–96.0%), and 0.84, respectively. For TRFC, sensitivity, specificity, and AUC were 35.3% (95% CI = 14.2–61.7%), 97.6% (95% CI = 87.4–99.9%), and 0.66 respectively. Interobserver agreement for IPH, LRNC, and TRFC using the Neurovascular Coil Protocol were k = 0.87 (95% CI = 0.75–0.99), k = 0.54 (95% CI = 0.29–0.80), and k = 0.41 (95% CI = 0.08–0.74), respectively.Data ConclusionOur Neurovascular Coil Protocol has high sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy in identifying IPH and LRNC but is limited in assessment of TRFC.Level of Evidence: 1Technical Efficacy: Stage 2J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2018;47:1264–1272.