Khabipova Diana, Wiaux Yves, Gruetter Rolf, Marques José P
Laboratory for Functional and Metabolic Imaging, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Institute of Sensors, Signals & Systems, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, UK.
Neuroimage. 2015 Feb 15;107:163-174. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.11.038. Epub 2014 Nov 22.
The aim of this study is to perform a thorough comparison of quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) techniques and their dependence on the assumptions made. The compared methodologies were: two iterative single orientation methodologies minimizing the l2, l1TV norm of the prior knowledge of the edges of the object, one over-determined multiple orientation method (COSMOS) and a newly proposed modulated closed-form solution (MCF). The performance of these methods was compared using a numerical phantom and in-vivo high resolution (0.65 mm isotropic) brain data acquired at 7 T using a new coil combination method. For all QSM methods, the relevant regularization and prior-knowledge parameters were systematically changed in order to evaluate the optimal reconstruction in the presence and absence of a ground truth. Additionally, the QSM contrast was compared to conventional gradient recalled echo (GRE) magnitude and R2* maps obtained from the same dataset. The QSM reconstruction results of the single orientation methods show comparable performance. The MCF method has the highest correlation (corr MCF=0.95, r(2)MCF=0.97) with the state of the art method (COSMOS) with additional advantage of extreme fast computation time. The L-curve method gave the visually most satisfactory balance between reduction of streaking artifacts and over-regularization with the latter being overemphasized when the using the COSMOS susceptibility maps as ground-truth. R2* and susceptibility maps, when calculated from the same datasets, although based on distinct features of the data, have a comparable ability to distinguish deep gray matter structures.
本研究的目的是对定量磁化率成像(QSM)技术及其对所作假设的依赖性进行全面比较。所比较的方法有:两种迭代单方向方法,它们分别使目标边缘先验知识的l2、l1TV范数最小化;一种超定多方向方法(COSMOS)和一种新提出的调制闭式解(MCF)。使用数值体模以及在7T磁场下采用新的线圈组合方法采集的体内高分辨率(各向同性0.65mm)脑数据,对这些方法的性能进行了比较。对于所有QSM方法,系统地改变相关的正则化和先验知识参数,以评估在有和没有真实值的情况下的最佳重建。此外,将QSM对比度与从同一数据集中获得的传统梯度回波(GRE)幅度图和R2图进行了比较。单方向方法的QSM重建结果显示出相当的性能。MCF方法与现有技术方法(COSMOS)具有最高的相关性(corr MCF = 0.95,r(2)MCF = 0.97),并且具有计算时间极快的额外优势。L曲线方法在减少条纹伪影和过度正则化之间给出了视觉上最令人满意的平衡,当将COSMOS磁化率图用作真实值时,后者被过度强调。当从相同数据集中计算时,R2图和磁化率图虽然基于数据的不同特征,但具有相当的区分深部灰质结构的能力。