A Slice‐Low‐Rank Plus Sparse (slice‐L + S) Reconstruction Method for k‐t Undersampled Multiband First‐Pass Myocardial Perfusion MRI.
Saved in:
| Title: | A Slice‐Low‐Rank Plus Sparse (slice‐L + S) Reconstruction Method for k‐t Undersampled Multiband First‐Pass Myocardial Perfusion MRI. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Sun, Changyu1,2,3 (AUTHOR), Robinson, Austin4 (AUTHOR), Wang, Yu1 (AUTHOR), Bilchick, Kenneth C.4 (AUTHOR), Kramer, Christopher M.4,5 (AUTHOR), Weller, Daniel1,5,6 (AUTHOR), Salerno, Michael1,4,5 (AUTHOR), Epstein, Frederick H.1,5 (AUTHOR) fredepstein@virginia.edu |
| Source: | Magnetic Resonance in Medicine. Sep2022, Vol. 88 Issue 3, p1140-1155. 16p. |
| Subjects: | Magnetic resonance imaging, Perfusion, Spatial resolution |
| Abstract: | Purpose: The synergistic use of k‐t undersampling and multiband (MB) imaging has the potential to provide extended slice coverage and high spatial resolution for first‐pass perfusion MRI. The low‐rank plus sparse (L + S) model has shown excellent performance for accelerating single‐band (SB) perfusion MRI. Methods: A MB data consistency method employing ESPIRiT maps and through‐plane coil information was developed. This data consistency method was combined with the temporal L + S constraint to form the slice‐L + S method. Slice‐L + S was compared to SB L + S and the sequential operations of split slice‐GRAPPA and SB L + S (seq‐SG‐L + S) using synthetic data formed from multislice SB images. Prospectively k‐t undersampled MB data were also acquired and reconstructed using seq‐SG‐L + S and slice‐L + S. Results: Using synthetic data with total acceleration rates of 6–12, slice‐L + S outperformed SB L + S and seq‐SG‐L + S (N = 7 subjects) with respect to normalized RMSE and the structural similarity index (P < 0.05 for both). For the specific case with MB factor = 3 and rate 3 undersampling, or for SB imaging with rate 9 undersampling (N = 7 subjects), the normalized RMSE values were 0.037 ± 0.007, 0.042 ± 0.005, and 0.031 ± 0.004; and the structural similarity index values were 0.88 ± 0.03, 0.85 ± 0.03, and 0.89 ± 0.02 for SB L + S, seq‐SG‐L + S, and slice‐L + S, respectively (P < 0.05 for both). For prospectively undersampled MB data, slice‐L + S provided better image quality than seq‐SG‐L + S for rate 6 (N = 7) and rate 9 acceleration (N = 7) as scored by blinded experts. Conclusion: Slice‐L + S outperformed SB‐L + S and seq‐SG‐L + S and provides 9 slice coverage of the left ventricle with a spatial resolution of 1.5 mm × 1.5 mm with good image quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Engineering Source |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
Be the first to leave a comment!
