Quantitative diffusion MRI using reduced field-of-view and multi-shot acquisition techniques: Validation in phantoms and prostate imaging

17Citations
Citations of this article
24Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the reproducibility of quantitative diffusion measurements obtained with reduced Field of View (rFOV) and Multi-shot EPI (msEPI) acquisitions, using single-shot EPI (ssEPI) as a reference. Methods: Diffusion phantom experiments, and prostate diffusion-weighted imaging in healthy volunteers and patients with known or suspected prostate cancer were performed across the three different sequences. Quantitative diffusion measurements of apparent diffusion coefficient, and diffusion kurtosis parameters (healthy volunteers), were obtained and compared across diffusion sequences (rFOV, msEPI, and ssEPI). Other possible confounding factors like b-value combinations and acquisition parameters were also investigated. Results: Both msEPI and rFOV have shown reproducible quantitative diffusion measurements relative to ssEPI; no significant difference in ADC was observed across pulse sequences in the standard diffusion phantom (p = 0.156), healthy volunteers (p ≥ 0.12) or patients (p ≥ 0.26). The ADC values within the non-cancerous central gland and peripheral zone of patients were 1.29 ± 0.17 × 10 −3 mm 2 /s and 1.74 ± 0.23 × 10 −3 mm 2 /s respectively. However, differences in quantitative diffusion parameters were observed across different number of averages for rFOV, and across b-value groups and diffusion models for all the three sequences. Conclusion: Both rFOV and msEPI have the potential to provide high image quality with reproducible quantitative diffusion measurements in prostate diffusion MRI.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Zhang, Y., Holmes, J., Rabanillo, I., Guidon, A., Wells, S., & Hernando, D. (2018). Quantitative diffusion MRI using reduced field-of-view and multi-shot acquisition techniques: Validation in phantoms and prostate imaging. Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 51, 173–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2018.04.006

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free