Quantitative metrics for evaluating parallel acquisition techniques in diffusion tensor imaging at 3 Tesla

Investigative Radiology

Volumn 41, Issue 11, 2006, Pages 806-814

  Ardekani, Siamak ^a   Selva, Luis ^b   Sayre, James ^b   Sinha, Usha ^b,c  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Comparison of parallel reconstructions; Diffusion tensor imaging; Quantitative metrics for image quality assessment

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL ERROR; ANISOTROPY; ARTICLE; ARTIFACT; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DIFFUSION COEFFICIENT; DIFFUSION TENSOR IMAGING; EVALUATION; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; NOISE; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STANDARD;

EID: 33749850387     PISSN: 00209996     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.rli.0000242859.75922.be     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Yoo SS, Park HJ, Soul JS, et al. In vivo visualization of white matter fiber tracts of preterm- and term-infant brains with diffusion tensor magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol. 2005;40:110-115.
2. Lee JW, Kim JH, Kang HS, et al. Optimization of acquisition parameters of diffusion-tensor magnetic resonance imaging in the spinal cord. Invest Radiol. 2006;41:553-559.
3. Basser PJ, Pierpaoli C. Microstructural and physiological features of tissue elucidated by quantitative diffusion tensor MRI. J Magn Med. B111:209-219.
4. Jaermann T, Crelier G, Pruessmann KP, et al. SENSE-DTI at 3 T. Magn Reson Med. 2004;51:230-236.
5. Heidemann RM. A brief review of parallel magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol. 2003;13:2323-2337.
6. Nael K, Ruehm SG, Michaely HJ, et al. High spatial-resolution CEMRA of the carotid circulation with parallel imaging: comparison of image quality between 2 different acceleration factors at 3.0 Tesla. Invest Radiol. 2006;41:391-399.
7. Bammer R, Auer M, Keeling SL, et al. Diffusion tensor imaging using single-shot SENSE-EPI. Magn Reson Med. 2002;48:128-136.
8. Bammer R, Keeling SL, Augustin M, et al. Improved diffusion-weighted single-shot echo-planar imaging (EPI) in stroke using sensitivity encoding (SENSE). Magn Reson Med. 2001;46:548-554.
9. Bhagat YA, Beaulieu C. Assessment of parallel acquisition techniques mSENSE and GRAPPA in Diffusion tensor imaging. Proc Int Soc Mag Reson Med. 2004, 2004;11:1193.
10. Bammer R, Schoenberg SO. Current concepts and advnces in clinical parallel magnetic resonance imaging. Top Magn Reson Imaging. 2004;15:129-158.
11. Blaimer M, Breuer F, Mueller M, et al. SMASH, SENSE, PILS, GRAPPA: how to choose the optimal method. Top Magn Reson Imaging. 2004;15:223-236.
12. Woods RP, Grafton ST, Holmes CJ, et al. Automated image registration: I. General methods and intrasubject, intramodality validation. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1998;22:139-152.
13. Cusack R, Brett M, Osswald K. An evaluation of the use of magnetic field maps to undistort echo-planar images. Neuroimage. 2003;18:127-142.
14. Ardekani S, Sinha U. Geometric distortion correction of high-resolution 3 T diffusion tensor brain images. Magn Reson Med. 2005;54:1163-1171.
15. Andersson JLR, Skare S. A model-based method for retrospective correction of geometric distortions in diffusion-weighted EPI. Neuroimage. 2002;6:77-199.
16. Reese TG, Heid M, Weisskoff RM, et al. Reduction of eddy-current-induced distortion in diffusion MRI using a twice-refocused spin echo. Magn Reson Med. 2003;49:177-182.
17. Conturo TE, McKinstry RC, Aronovitz JA, et al. Diffusion MRI: precision, accuracy and flow effects. NMR Biomed. 1995;8:307-332.
18. Bastin ME, Armitage PA, Marshall I. A theoretical study of the effect of experimental noise on the measurement of anisotropy in diffusion imaging. Magn Reson Imaging. 1998;16:773-785.