English
 
User Manual Privacy Policy Disclaimer Contact us
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT
  On the accuracy of T1 mapping: Searching for common ground

Stikov, N., Boudreau, M., Levesque, I. R., Tardif, C., Barral, J. K., & Pike, G. B. (2015). On the accuracy of T1 mapping: Searching for common ground. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, 73(2), 514-522. doi:10.1002/mrm.25135.

Item is

Basic

show hide
Item Permalink: http://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0029-AC4D-9 Version Permalink: http://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0003-7970-7
Genre: Journal Article

Files

show Files

Locators

show

Creators

show
hide
 Creators:
Stikov, Nikola1, Author
Boudreau, Mathieu1, Author
Levesque, Ives R.2, Author
Tardif, Christine3, Author              
Barral, Joëlle K.4, Author
Pike, G. Bruce1, Author
Affiliations:
1McConnell Brain Imaging Centre, Montreal Neurological Institute and Hospital, McGill University, Montréal, QC, Canada, ou_persistent22              
2Department of Radiology, Stanford University, CA, USA, ou_persistent22              
3Department Neurophysics, MPI for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Max Planck Society, Leipzig, DE, ou_634550              
4Department of Electrical Engineering, Stanford University, CA, USA, ou_persistent22              

Content

show
hide
Free keywords: Relaxometry; T1 mapping; Quantitative MRI; Accuracy; Precision; Inversion recovery; Look-locker; Variable flip angle; B1 mapping
 Abstract: Purpose: There are many T1 mapping methods available, each of them validated in phantoms and reporting excellent agreement with literature. However, values in literature vary greatly, with T1 in white matter ranging from 690 to 1100 ms at 3 Tesla. This brings into question the accuracy of one of the most fundamental measurements in quantitative MRI. Our goal was to explain these variations and look into ways of mitigating them. Theory and Methods: We evaluated the three most common T1 mapping methods (inversion recovery, Look-Locker, and variable flip angle) through Bloch simulations, a white matter phantom and the brains of 10 healthy subjects (single-slice). We pooled the T1 histograms of the subjects to determine whether there is a sequence-dependent bias and whether it is reproducible across subjects. Results: We found good agreement between the three methods in phantoms, but poor agreement in vivo, with the white matter T1 histogram peak in healthy subjects varying by more than 30% depending on the method used. We also found that the pooled brain histograms displayed three distinct white matter peaks, with Look-Locker consistently underestimating, and variable flip angle overestimating the inversion recovery T1 values. The Bloch simulations indicated that incomplete spoiling and inaccurate B1 mapping could account for the observed differences. Conclusion: We conclude that the three most common T1 mapping protocols produce stable T1 values in phantoms, but not in vivo. To improve the accuracy of T1 mapping, we recommend that sites perform in vivo validation of their T1 mapping method against the inversion recovery reference method, as the first step toward developing a robust calibration scheme.

Details

show
hide
Language(s): eng - English
 Dates: 2013-08-262013-12-262014-02-272015-02
 Publication Status: Published in print
 Pages: -
 Publishing info: -
 Table of Contents: -
 Rev. Method: Peer
 Identifiers: DOI: 10.1002/mrm.25135
PMID: 24578189
Other: Epub 2014
 Degree: -

Event

show

Legal Case

show

Project information

show

Source 1

show
hide
Title: Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
Source Genre: Journal
 Creator(s):
Affiliations:
Publ. Info: New York : Wiley-Liss
Pages: - Volume / Issue: 73 (2) Sequence Number: - Start / End Page: 514 - 522 Identifier: ISSN: 0740-3194
CoNE: https://pure.mpg.de/cone/journals/resource/954925538149