Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2018
Accelerating 3D-T1ρ mapping of cartilage using compressed sensing with different sparse and low rank models.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zibetti Marcelo V W, Sharafi Azadeh, Otazo Ricardo, Regatte Ravinder R
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate the feasibility of using compressed sensing (CS) to accelerate 3D-T1ρ mapping of cartilage and to reduce total scan times without degrading the estimation of T1ρ relaxation times.
METHODS: Fully sampled 3D-T1ρ datasets were retrospectively undersampled by factors 2-10. CS reconstruction using 12 different sparsifying transforms were compared, including finite differences, temporal and spatial wavelets, learned transforms using principal component analysis (PCA) and K-means singular value decomposition (K-SVD), explicit exponential models, low rank and low rank plus sparse models. Spatial filtering prior to T1ρ parameter estimation was also tested. Synthetic phantom (n = 6) and in vivo human knee cartilage datasets (n = 7) were included.
RESULTS: Most CS methods performed satisfactorily for an acceleration factor (AF) of 2, with relative T1ρ error lower than 4.5%. Some sparsifying transforms, such as spatiotemporal finite difference (STFD), exponential dictionaries (EXP) and low rank combined with spatial finite difference (L+S SFD) significantly improved this performance, reaching average relative T1ρ error below 6.5% on T1ρ relaxation times with AF up to 10, when spatial filtering was used before T1ρ fitting, at the expense of smoothing the T1ρ maps. The STFD achieved 5.1% error at AF = 10 with spatial filtering prior to T1ρ fitting.
CONCLUSION: Accelerating 3D-T1ρ mapping of cartilage with CS is feasible up to AF of 10 when using STFD, EXP or L+S SFD regularizers. These three best CS methods performed satisfactorily on synthetic phantom and in vivo knee cartilage for AFs up to 10, with T1ρ error of 6.5%.
METHODS: Fully sampled 3D-T1ρ datasets were retrospectively undersampled by factors 2-10. CS reconstruction using 12 different sparsifying transforms were compared, including finite differences, temporal and spatial wavelets, learned transforms using principal component analysis (PCA) and K-means singular value decomposition (K-SVD), explicit exponential models, low rank and low rank plus sparse models. Spatial filtering prior to T1ρ parameter estimation was also tested. Synthetic phantom (n = 6) and in vivo human knee cartilage datasets (n = 7) were included.
RESULTS: Most CS methods performed satisfactorily for an acceleration factor (AF) of 2, with relative T1ρ error lower than 4.5%. Some sparsifying transforms, such as spatiotemporal finite difference (STFD), exponential dictionaries (EXP) and low rank combined with spatial finite difference (L+S SFD) significantly improved this performance, reaching average relative T1ρ error below 6.5% on T1ρ relaxation times with AF up to 10, when spatial filtering was used before T1ρ fitting, at the expense of smoothing the T1ρ maps. The STFD achieved 5.1% error at AF = 10 with spatial filtering prior to T1ρ fitting.
CONCLUSION: Accelerating 3D-T1ρ mapping of cartilage with CS is feasible up to AF of 10 when using STFD, EXP or L+S SFD regularizers. These three best CS methods performed satisfactorily on synthetic phantom and in vivo knee cartilage for AFs up to 10, with T1ρ error of 6.5%.