Improved MR venography using quantitative susceptibility-weighted imaging

Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Volumn 40, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 698-708

  Liu, Saifeng ^a   Mok, Karen ^a   Neelavalli, Jaladhar ^b   Cheng, Yu Chung N ^b   Tang, Jin ^c   Ye, Yongquan ^b   Haacke, E Mark ^a,b,c  

^a MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c MRI Institute for Biomedical Research   (United States)

Author keywords

phase imaging; quantitative susceptibility mapping; susceptibility weighted imaging

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BRAIN VEIN; CONTRAST; HUMAN; MAGNETIC RESONANCE ANGIOGRAPHY; MAGNETIC RESONANCE VENOGRAPHY; NORMAL HUMAN; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SCANNER; PHLEBOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; SIMULATION; SUSCEPTIBILITY WEIGHTED IMAGING; TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY; ALGORITHM; ANATOMY AND HISTOLOGY; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGING PHANTOM; PROCEDURES; VEIN;

ALGORITHMS; HEALTHY VOLUNTEERS; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAGNETIC RESONANCE ANGIOGRAPHY; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; VEINS;

EID: 84906086586     PISSN: 10531807     EISSN: 15222586     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.24413     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Haacke EM, Xu Y, Cheng YN, Reichenbach JR,. Susceptibility weighted imaging (SWI). Magn Reson Med 2004; 52: 612-618.
2. Mittal S, Wu Z, Neelavalli J, Haacke EM,. Susceptibility-weighted imaging: technical aspects and clinical applications, Part 2. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2009; 30: 232-252.
3. Haacke EM, Reichenbach JR, (eds.). Susceptibility weighted imaging in MRI: basic concepts and clinical applications, 1st ed. New York: Wiley-Blackwell; 2011.
4. Haacke EM, Brown RW, Thompson MR, Venkatesan R,. Magnetic resonance imaging: physical principles and sequence design, 1st ed. New York; Wiley Periodicals; 1999.
5. Marques JP, Bowtell R,. Application of a Fourier-based method for rapid calculation of field inhomogeneity due to spatial variation of magnetic susceptibility. Concepts Magn Reson B Magn Reson Eng 2005; 25B: 65-78.
6. Xu Y, Haacke EM,. The role of voxel aspect ratio in determining apparent vascular phase behavior in susceptibility weighted imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 24: 155-160.
7. Haacke EM, Tang J, Neelavalli J, Cheng YC,. Susceptibility mapping as a means to visualize veins and quantify oxygen saturation. J Magn Reson Imaging 2010; 32: 663-676.
8. Tang J, Liu S, Neelavalli J, Cheng YCN, Buch S, Haacke EM,. Improving susceptibility mapping using a threshold-based k-space/image domain iterative reconstruction approach. Magn Reson Med 2013; 69: 1396-1407.
9. Schweser F, Deistung A, Lehr BW, Reichenbach JR,. Quantitative imaging of intrinsic magnetic tissue properties using MRI signal phase: an approach to in vivo brain iron metabolism? NeuroImage 2011; 54: 2789-2807.
10. Schweser F, Sommer K, Deistung A, Reichenbach JR,. Quantitative susceptibility mapping for investigating subtle susceptibility variations in the human brain. Neuroimage 2012; 62: 2083-2100.
11. Shmueli K, de Zwart JA, van Gelderen P, Li T, Dodd SJ, Duyn JH,. Magnetic susceptibility mapping of brain tissue in vivo using MRI phase data. Magn Reson Med 2009; 62: 1510-1522.
12. Liu T, Spincemaille P, de Rochefort L, Kressler B, Wang Y,. Calculation of susceptibility through multiple orientation sampling (COSMOS): a method for conditioning the inverse problem from measured magnetic field map to susceptibility source image in MRI. Magn Reson Med 2009; 61: 196-204.
13. Liu J, Liu T, de Rochefort L, et al. Morphology enabled dipole inversion for quantitative susceptibility mapping using structural consistency between the magnitude image and the susceptibility map. Neuroimage 2012; 59: 2560-2568.
14. De Rochefort L, Liu T, Kressler B, et al. Quantitative susceptibility map reconstruction from MR phase data using Bayesian regularization: Validation and application to brain imaging. Magn Reson Med 2010; 63: 194-206.
15. Wharton S, Bowtell R,. Whole-brain susceptibility mapping at high field: a comparison of multiple- and single-orientation methods. NeuroImage 2010; 53: 515-525.
16. Jain V, Abdulmalik O, Propert KJ, Wehrli FW,. Investigating the magnetic susceptibility properties of fresh human blood for noninvasive oxygen saturation quantification. Magn Reson Med 2012; 68: 863-867.
17. Smith SM,. Fast robust automated brain extraction. Hum Brain Mapp 2002; 17: 143-155.
18. Abdul-Rahman HS, Gdeisat MA, Burton DR, Lalor MJ, Lilley F, Moore CJ,. Fast and robust three-dimensional best path phase unwrapping algorithm. Appl Opt 2007; 46: 6623-6635.
19. Xu Y, Haacke EM,. An iterative reconstruction technique for geometric distortion-corrected segmented echo-planar imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 2008; 26: 1406-1414.
20. Zwanenburg JJM, Versluis MJ, Luijten PR, Petridou N,. Fast high resolution whole brain T2* weighted imaging using echo planar imaging at 7T. Neuroimage 2011; 56: 1902-1907.
21. Liu T, Khalidov I, de Rochefort L, et al. A novel background field removal method for MRI using projection onto dipole fields (PDF). NMR Biomed 2011; 24: 1129-1136.