Journal of radiological science and technology (대한방사선기술학회지:방사선기술과학)

Korean Society of Radiological Science (대한방사선과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparative Analysis of Cartesian Trajectory and MultiVane Trajectory Using ACR Phantom in MRI : Using Image Intensity Uniformity Test and Low-contrast Object Detectability Test

ACR 팬텀을 이용한 Cartesian Trajectory와 MultiVane Trajectory의 비교분석 : 영상강도 균질성과 저대조도 검체 검출률 test를 사용하여

  • Nam, Soon-Kwon (Department of Physics, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Choi, Joon-Ho (Department of Physics, Kangwon National University)
  • Received : 2019.02.03
  • Accepted : 2019.02.25
  • Published : 2019.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study conducted a comparative analysis of differences between cartesian trajectory in a linear rectangular coordinate system and MultiVane trajectory in a nonlinear rectangular coordinate system axial T1 and axial T2 images using an American College of Radiology(ACR) phantom. The phantom was placed at the center of the head coil and the top-to-bottom and left-to-right levels were adjusted by using a level. The experiment was performed according to the Phantom Test Guidance provided by the ACR, and sagittal localizer images were obtained. As shown in Figure 2, slices # 1 and # 11 were scanned after placing them at the center of a $45^{\circ}$ wedge shape, and a total of 11 slices were obtained. According to the evaluation results, the image intensity uniformity(IIU) was 93.34% for the cartesian trajectory, and 93.19% for the MultiVane trajectory, both of which fall under the normal range in the axial T1 image. The IIU for the cartesian trajectory was 0.15% higher than that for the MultiVane trajectory. In axial T2, the IIU was 96.44% for the cartesian trajectory, and 95.97% for the MultiVane trajectory, which fall under the normal range. The IIU for the cartesian trajectory was by 0.47% higher than that for the MultiVane trajectory. As a result, the cartesian technique was superior to the MultiVane technique in terms of the high-contrast spatial resolution, image intensity uniformity, and low-contrast object detectability.

Keywords

References

  1. Zhu Z, Yang R, Zhang J, Zhang C. Compressed sensing MRI by Two-Dimensional wavelet filter banks. Int Workshop on Multidimensional (nD) Systems. 2011;1-6.
  2. Lee HB, Choi KW, Son SY. Usefulness analysis of radial non-cartesian trajectory in the high-resolution MRA. J Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Soc. 2013;14(12):6284-9. https://doi.org/10.5762/KAIS.2013.14.12.6284
  3. Fujimoto K, Koyama T, Tamai K, Morisawa N, Okada T, Togashi K. BLADE acquisition method improves T2-weighted MR images of the female pelvis compared with a standard fast spin-echo sequence. Eur J Radiol. 2011;80:796-801. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.08.002
  4. Levine E, Daniel B, Vasanawala S, Hargreaves B, Saranathan M. 3D Cartesian MRI with compressed sensing and variable view sharing using complementary poisson-disc sampling. Magn Reson Med. 2001;44(3):317-23.
  5. Zhu S, Gao S, Cheng L, Bao S. Review: K-Space trajectory development. International Conference on Mechanical Industrial and production engineering. 2013;356-60.
  6. d'Arcy J, Collins D, Rowland J, Padhani A, Leach M. Application of sliding window reconstruction with Cartesian sampling for dynamic contrast enhanced MRI. NMR Biomed. 2002;15:174-83. https://doi.org/10.1002/nbm.755
  7. Saranathan M, Rettmann DW, Hargreaves BA, Clarke SE, Vasanawala SS. Differential subsampling with cartesian ordering (DISCO): A high spatio‐temporal resolution dixon imaging sequence for multiphasic contrast enhanced abdominal imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2012;35(6):1484-92. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.23602
  8. Park SK, Ahn CB, Sim DG, Park HC. Study of motion effects in cartesian and spiral parallel MRI using computer simulation. J Korean Soc Magn Reson Med. 2008;12(2):123-30.
  9. Attenberger UI, Runge VM, Williams KD, et al. T1-Weighted brain imaging with a 32-channel coil at 3T using turboFLASH BLADE compared with standard cartesian k-space sampling. Invest Radiol. 2009;44(3):177-83. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0b013e318198a1fd
  10. Wright KL, Hamilton JI, Griswold MA, Gulani V, Seiberlich N. Non-Cartesian parallel imaging reconstruction. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2014;40(5); 1022-40. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.24521
  11. Kang KA, Kim YK, Kim EJ, et al. T2-weighted liver MRI using the MultiVane technique at 3T: Comparison with conventional T2-weighted MRI. Korean J Radiol. 2015;16(5):1038-46. https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2015.16.5.1038
  12. Ohshita T. Basic examination of an image characteristic in Multivane. Jpn J Radiological Technology. 2011;67(10):1298-303. https://doi.org/10.6009/jjrt.67.1298
  13. Deng J, Larson AC. Multishot targeted PROPELLER magnetic resonance imaging: Description of the technique and initial applications. Invest Radiol. 2009;44(8):454-62. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0b013e3181a8b015
  14. Haneder S, Dinter D, Gutfleisch A, Schoenberg SO, Michael HJ. Image quality of T2w-TSE of the abdomen and pelvis with cartesian or BLADE type k-space sampling: A retrospective inter individual comparison study. Eur J Radiol. 2011;79:177-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.12.028
  15. Reston, Phantom test guidance for the ACR MRI accreditation program. ACR; 1998.
  16. American College of Radiology: Phantom Test Gudiance for ACR MRI Accreditation Program, 2005.
  17. American Colleage of Radiology. Site Scanning Instructions for Use of MR Phantom for the ACRTM MRI Accreditation Program 2002 http://www.acr.org/-/media/ACR/Documents/Accreditation/MRI/Large Phantom Instruction.Pdf Accessed July 2. 2018.
  18. Kaljustea D, Nigulb M. Evaluation of the ACR MRI phantom for quality assurance tests of 1.5T MRI scanners in Estonian hospital. P Est Acad Sci. 2014;63(3):328-34.
  19. Lee JW, Ahn KJ, Lee SK, et al. Usefulness of ACR MRI phantom for quality assurance of MRI instruments. J Korean Radiol S. 2006;54:47-5. https://doi.org/10.3348/jkrs.2006.54.1.47
  20. Lee SJ, Yu SM. The image evaluation of iterative motion correction reconstruction algorithm PROPELLER T2-weighted imaging compared with MultiVane T2-weighted imaging. J Korean Physical S. 2017;71(4):238-43. https://doi.org/10.3938/jkps.71.238