Considerations for hyperpolarized 13C MR at reduced field: Comparing 1.5T versus 3T

被引:1
|
作者
Traechtler, Julia [1 ]
Fuetterer, Maximilian [1 ]
Albannay, Mohammed M. [1 ,2 ]
Hoh, Tobias [1 ]
Kozerke, Sebastian [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ & ETH Zurich, Inst Biomed Engn, Zurich, Switzerland
[2] Swiss Fed Inst Technol, Lab Phys Chem, Zurich, Switzerland
[3] Univ & ETH Zurich, Inst Biomed Engn, Gloriastr 35, CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland
基金
欧盟地平线“2020”;
关键词
1.5T versus 3T; field comparison; field inhomogeneities; signal-to-noise; ratio; TO-NOISE RATIO; PULSE SEQUENCE; RF COILS; LUNG MRI; EXCITATION; SURFACE;
D O I
10.1002/mrm.29579
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Purpose: In contrast to conventional MR, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) is not linearly dependent on field strength in hyperpolarized MR, as polarization is generated outside the MR system. Moreover, field inhomogeneity-induced artifacts and other practical limitations associated with field strengths =3T are alleviated at lower fields. The potential of hyperpolarized 13C spectroscopy and imaging at 1.5T versus 3T is demonstrated in silico, in vitro, and in vivo for applications on clinical MR systems. Theory and Methods: Theoretical noise and SNR behavior at different field strengths are investigated based on simulations. A thorough field comparison between 1.5T and 3T is performed using thermal and hyperpolarized 13C spectroscopy and imaging. Cardiac in vivo data is obtained in pigs using hyperpolarized [1-13C]pyruvate spectroscopy and imaging at 1.5T and 3T. Results: Based on theoretical considerations and simulations, the SNRof hyperpolarized MR at identical acquisition bandwidths is independent of the field strength for typical coil setups, while adaptively changing the acquisition bandwidth proportional to the static magnetic field allows for net SNR gains of up to 40% at 1.5T compared to 3T. In vitro 13C data verified these considerations with less than 7% deviation. In vivo feasibility of hyperpolarized [1-13C]pyruvate dynamic metabolic spectroscopy and imaging at 1.5T is demonstrated in the pig heart with comparable SNR between 1.5T and 3T while B0 artifacts are noticeably reduced at 1.5T. Conclusion: Hyperpolarized 13C MR at lower field strengths is favorable in terms of SNR and off-resonance effects, which makes 1.5T a promising alternative to 3T, especially for clinical cardiac metabolic imaging.
引用
收藏
页码:1945 / 1960
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] COMPARING BETWEEN MR SPECTROSCOPY DONE AT 1.5T AND 3T
    Tang, Phua Hwee
    Nisa, Sameema
    NEURO-ONCOLOGY, 2022, 24 : 77 - 77
  • [2] Susceptibility Effects in Hyperpolarized 3He Lung MRI at 1.5T and 3T
    Deppe, Martin H.
    Parra-Robles, Juan
    Ajraoui, Salma
    Parnell, Steven R.
    Clemence, Matthew
    Schulte, Rolf F.
    Wild, Jim M.
    JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2009, 30 (02) : 418 - 423
  • [3] Hyperpolarized 129Xe gas transfer MRI: the transition from 1.5T to 3T
    Wang, Ziyi
    He, Mu
    Bier, Elianna
    Rankine, Leith
    Schrank, Geoffry
    Rajagopal, Sudarshan
    Huang, Yuh-Chin
    Kelsey, Christopher
    Womack, Samantha
    Mammarappallil, Joseph
    Driehuys, Bastiaan
    MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICINE, 2018, 80 (06) : 2374 - 2383
  • [4] What you Need to Know About MR Neuroimaging at 1.5T and 3T
    Tanenbaum, L.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2010, 194 (05)
  • [5] Quantitative DCEMRI of the Breast at 1.5T and 3T
    Pineda, F.
    Medved, M.
    Fan, X.
    Ivancevic, M.
    Newstead, G.
    Abe, H.
    Sennett, C.
    Karczmar, G.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2013, 40 (06)
  • [6] 7T MR of intracranial pathology: Preliminary observations and comparisons to 3T and 1.5T
    Obusez, Emmanuel C.
    Lowe, Mark
    Oh, Se-Hong
    Wang, Irene
    Bullen, Jennifer
    Ruggieri, Paul
    Hill, Virginia
    Lockwood, Daniel
    Emch, Todd
    Moon, Doksu
    Loy, Gareth
    Lee, Jonathan
    Kiczek, Matthew
    Massand, Manoj
    Statsevych, Volodymyr
    Stultz, Todd
    Jones, Stephen E.
    NEUROIMAGE, 2018, 168 : 459 - 476
  • [7] MR Diagnosis of Bone Metastases at 1.5T and 3T: Can STIR Imaging Be Omitted?
    Ohlmann-Knafo, S.
    Tarnoki, A. D.
    Tarnoki, D. L.
    Pickuth, D.
    ROFO-FORTSCHRITTE AUF DEM GEBIET DER RONTGENSTRAHLEN UND DER BILDGEBENDEN VERFAHREN, 2015, 187 (10): : 924 - 932
  • [8] Introducer Needles of Peripheral Intravenous Catheters: Assessment of Magnetic Field Interactions with 1.5T and 3T MR Systems
    Sakai, Mio
    Aoki, Shigeki
    Watanabe, Yasushi
    Tanabe, Daisaku
    Taga, Takashi
    Inoue, Yusuke
    Ohtomo, Kuni
    Nakamura, Hironobu
    MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICAL SCIENCES, 2009, 8 (04) : 181 - 185
  • [9] T1 at 1.5T and 3T compared with conventional T2*at 1.5T for cardiac siderosis
    Alam, Mohammed H.
    Auger, Dominique
    Smith, Gillian C.
    He, Taigang
    Vassiliou, Vassilis
    Baksi, A. John
    Wage, Rick
    Drivas, Peter
    Feng, Yanqiu
    Firmin, David N.
    Pennell, Dudley J.
    JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE, 2015, 17
  • [10] T1 at 1.5T and 3T compared with conventional T2* at 1.5T for cardiac siderosis
    Mohammed H. Alam
    Dominique Auger
    Gillian C. Smith
    Taigang He
    Vassilis Vassiliou
    A. John Baksi
    Rick Wage
    Peter Drivas
    Yanqiu Feng
    David N. Firmin
    Dudley J. Pennell
    Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, 17