Reproducibility of T1 relaxation times in diagnostic MRI: A phantom study

Q3 Medicine
Derick Yongabi , Nathalie Mertens , Ronald Peeters
{"title":"Reproducibility of T1 relaxation times in diagnostic MRI: A phantom study","authors":"Derick Yongabi ,&nbsp;Nathalie Mertens ,&nbsp;Ronald Peeters","doi":"10.1016/j.phmed.2021.100038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>T<sub>1</sub> mapping is crucial for many quantitative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) procedures. However, studies have reported wide T<sub>1</sub> variations, both <em>in vivo</em> and <em>in vitro</em>. Since clinical decisions depend on T<sub>1</sub> relaxation times, evaluating the factors affecting their reproducibility is necessary. Available studies are limited in that they do not provide a comparative perspective on the variation of T<sub>1</sub> relaxation times as a function of relevant parameters, such as pulse sequence type, magnetic field strength and how their interplay with the scanner model affects the resulting T<sub>1</sub> values. To address these gaps, we imaged two phantoms modelling T<sub>1</sub> of different samples at 1.5 T and 3.0 T using fast and slow inversion recovery (IR) sequences. The results show that T<sub>1</sub> relaxation times from 3.0 T scanners are accurate and reproducible in terms of the expected reference values and when compared between different scanner models. Similarly, T<sub>1</sub> values measured with the two pulse sequences were similar for all 3.0 T scanners. On the contrary, 1.5 T scanners exhibited larger discrepancies in the measured T<sub>1</sub> compared with the reference values. In addition, 1.5 T scanners displayed less reproducibility in T<sub>1</sub> relaxation time measurements across different 1.5 T scanners, and pulse sequences.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":37787,"journal":{"name":"Physics in Medicine","volume":"12 ","pages":"Article 100038"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.phmed.2021.100038","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physics in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352451021000044","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

T1 mapping is crucial for many quantitative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) procedures. However, studies have reported wide T1 variations, both in vivo and in vitro. Since clinical decisions depend on T1 relaxation times, evaluating the factors affecting their reproducibility is necessary. Available studies are limited in that they do not provide a comparative perspective on the variation of T1 relaxation times as a function of relevant parameters, such as pulse sequence type, magnetic field strength and how their interplay with the scanner model affects the resulting T1 values. To address these gaps, we imaged two phantoms modelling T1 of different samples at 1.5 T and 3.0 T using fast and slow inversion recovery (IR) sequences. The results show that T1 relaxation times from 3.0 T scanners are accurate and reproducible in terms of the expected reference values and when compared between different scanner models. Similarly, T1 values measured with the two pulse sequences were similar for all 3.0 T scanners. On the contrary, 1.5 T scanners exhibited larger discrepancies in the measured T1 compared with the reference values. In addition, 1.5 T scanners displayed less reproducibility in T1 relaxation time measurements across different 1.5 T scanners, and pulse sequences.

诊断性MRI T1弛豫时间的再现性:一项幻像研究
T1映射是许多定量磁共振成像(MRI)程序的关键。然而,研究报告了体内和体外T1的广泛变化。由于临床决定取决于T1松弛时间,评估影响其重复性的因素是必要的。现有的研究是有限的,因为它们没有提供T1弛豫时间作为相关参数(如脉冲序列类型、磁场强度以及它们与扫描仪模型的相互作用如何影响所得T1值)的函数的变化的比较视角。为了解决这些差距,我们使用快速和慢速反演恢复(IR)序列对不同样品在1.5 T和3.0 T下模拟T1的两个幻影进行了成像。结果表明,3.0 T扫描仪的T1弛豫时间在期望参考值方面是准确的,并且在不同扫描仪型号之间进行了比较。同样,用两个脉冲序列测量的T1值在所有3.0 T扫描仪上都是相似的。相反,与参考值相比,1.5 T扫描仪的测量T1差异更大。此外,1.5 T扫描仪在不同1.5 T扫描仪和脉冲序列的T1弛豫时间测量中显示出较低的再现性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Physics in Medicine
Physics in Medicine Physics and Astronomy-Instrumentation
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: The scope of Physics in Medicine consists of the application of theoretical and practical physics to medicine, physiology and biology. Topics covered are: Physics of Imaging Ultrasonic imaging, Optical imaging, X-ray imaging, Fluorescence Physics of Electromagnetics Neural Engineering, Signal analysis in Medicine, Electromagnetics and the nerve system, Quantum Electronics Physics of Therapy Ultrasonic therapy, Vibrational medicine, Laser Physics Physics of Materials and Mechanics Physics of impact and injuries, Physics of proteins, Metamaterials, Nanoscience and Nanotechnology, Biomedical Materials, Physics of vascular and cerebrovascular diseases, Micromechanics and Micro engineering, Microfluidics in medicine, Mechanics of the human body, Rotary molecular motors, Biological physics, Physics of bio fabrication and regenerative medicine Physics of Instrumentation Engineering of instruments, Physical effects of the application of instruments, Measurement Science and Technology, Physics of micro-labs and bioanalytical sensor devices, Optical instrumentation, Ultrasound instruments Physics of Hearing and Seeing Acoustics and hearing, Physics of hearing aids, Optics and vision, Physics of vision aids Physics of Space Medicine Space physiology, Space medicine related Physics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信