2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2020.08.009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

MRI phase offset correction method impacts quantitative susceptibility mapping

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The clinical translation of a QSM-based method for the examination of cortical regions would benefit from adaptations of the measurement techniques to the clinical setting. Our results suggest that the acquisition of single-echo data [40] rather than multiple echoes as well as the choice of a few representative ROIs instead of the whole brain may suffice to distinguish AD from HC based on the proposed QSM method. Such choices can significantly reduce the scanning times and may eventually be traded with an increased spatial resolution at lower field strengths of 7T and, possibly, at 3T.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The clinical translation of a QSM-based method for the examination of cortical regions would benefit from adaptations of the measurement techniques to the clinical setting. Our results suggest that the acquisition of single-echo data [40] rather than multiple echoes as well as the choice of a few representative ROIs instead of the whole brain may suffice to distinguish AD from HC based on the proposed QSM method. Such choices can significantly reduce the scanning times and may eventually be traded with an increased spatial resolution at lower field strengths of 7T and, possibly, at 3T.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Complex images were computed using an ASPIRE-like algorithm [39]. Single-echo phase data were used for QSM calculation to generate more accurate and homogeneous susceptibility maps [40]. Specifically, phase data from the third echo (17.92 ms) was chosen as it provided the highest grey/white matter contrast in the QSM images compared to combinations of the echoes and corresponds to the TE with the highest signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) based on our previously reported R 2 * values of 60-70s -1 in the AD patients’ cortex [24].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To better estimate 𝜙 0 , the two TEs chosen should be as short as possible but sufficiently far apart to allow phase evolution between echoes. 62 Including the initial phase component in the nonlinear signal modeling and fitting may be worth exploring in future studies.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, because the microstructure‐induced nonlinear frequency evolution is largest at short TEs, the estimated ϕ0$$ {\phi}_0 $$ by MCPC‐3D may contain significant errors, which in turn affects the estimated effective frequency evolution and the fitted f$$ \Delta f $$ values. To better estimate ϕ0$$ {\phi}_0 $$, the two TEs chosen should be as short as possible but sufficiently far apart to allow phase evolution between echoes 62 . Including the initial phase component in the nonlinear signal modeling and fitting may be worth exploring in future studies.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, no further QSM analysis was made in order to better evaluate the impact each method had on susceptibility maps, specifically when looking on specific brain regions. [ 1 ] compared the impact different offset correction methods had on phase maps, focusing on QSM application. Their results showed differences between methods, which implies that the choice of phase reconstruction method can alter the resulting QSM, but no region-specific analysis was made.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%