We have located links that may give you full text access.
Accelerating 3D-T 1ρ mapping of cartilage using compressed sensing with different sparse and low rank models.
Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 2018 October
PURPOSE: To evaluate the feasibility of using compressed sensing (CS) to accelerate 3D-T1ρ mapping of cartilage and to reduce total scan times without degrading the estimation of T1ρ relaxation times.
METHODS: Fully sampled 3D-T1ρ datasets were retrospectively undersampled by factors 2-10. CS reconstruction using 12 different sparsifying transforms were compared, including finite differences, temporal and spatial wavelets, learned transforms using principal component analysis (PCA) and K-means singular value decomposition (K-SVD), explicit exponential models, low rank and low rank plus sparse models. Spatial filtering prior to T1ρ parameter estimation was also tested. Synthetic phantom (n = 6) and in vivo human knee cartilage datasets (n = 7) were included.
RESULTS: Most CS methods performed satisfactorily for an acceleration factor (AF) of 2, with relative T1ρ error lower than 4.5%. Some sparsifying transforms, such as spatiotemporal finite difference (STFD), exponential dictionaries (EXP) and low rank combined with spatial finite difference (L+S SFD) significantly improved this performance, reaching average relative T1ρ error below 6.5% on T1ρ relaxation times with AF up to 10, when spatial filtering was used before T1ρ fitting, at the expense of smoothing the T1ρ maps. The STFD achieved 5.1% error at AF = 10 with spatial filtering prior to T1ρ fitting.
CONCLUSION: Accelerating 3D-T1ρ mapping of cartilage with CS is feasible up to AF of 10 when using STFD, EXP or L+S SFD regularizers. These three best CS methods performed satisfactorily on synthetic phantom and in vivo knee cartilage for AFs up to 10, with T1ρ error of 6.5%.
METHODS: Fully sampled 3D-T1ρ datasets were retrospectively undersampled by factors 2-10. CS reconstruction using 12 different sparsifying transforms were compared, including finite differences, temporal and spatial wavelets, learned transforms using principal component analysis (PCA) and K-means singular value decomposition (K-SVD), explicit exponential models, low rank and low rank plus sparse models. Spatial filtering prior to T1ρ parameter estimation was also tested. Synthetic phantom (n = 6) and in vivo human knee cartilage datasets (n = 7) were included.
RESULTS: Most CS methods performed satisfactorily for an acceleration factor (AF) of 2, with relative T1ρ error lower than 4.5%. Some sparsifying transforms, such as spatiotemporal finite difference (STFD), exponential dictionaries (EXP) and low rank combined with spatial finite difference (L+S SFD) significantly improved this performance, reaching average relative T1ρ error below 6.5% on T1ρ relaxation times with AF up to 10, when spatial filtering was used before T1ρ fitting, at the expense of smoothing the T1ρ maps. The STFD achieved 5.1% error at AF = 10 with spatial filtering prior to T1ρ fitting.
CONCLUSION: Accelerating 3D-T1ρ mapping of cartilage with CS is feasible up to AF of 10 when using STFD, EXP or L+S SFD regularizers. These three best CS methods performed satisfactorily on synthetic phantom and in vivo knee cartilage for AFs up to 10, with T1ρ error of 6.5%.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app