Signal-to-noise ratio, contrast-to-noise ratio and pharmacokinetic modeling considerations in dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging.

With advances in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) technology, dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE)-MRI is approaching the capability to simultaneously deliver both high spatial and high temporal resolutions for clinical applications. However, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) considerations and their impacts regarding pharmacokinetic modeling of the time-course data continue to represent challenges in the design of DCE-MRI acquisitions. Given that many acquisition parameters can affect the nature of DCE-MRI data, minimizing tissue-specific data acquisition discrepancy (among sites and scanner models) is as important as synchronizing pharmacokinetic modeling approaches. For cancer-related DCE-MRI studies where rapid contrast reagent (CR) extravasation is expected, current DCE-MRI protocols often adopt a three-dimensional fast low-angle shot (FLASH) sequence to achieve spatial-temporal resolution requirements. Based on breast and prostate DCE-MRI data acquired with different FLASH sequence parameters, this paper elucidates a number of SNR and CNR considerations for acquisition optimization and pharmacokinetic modeling implications therein. Simulations based on region of interest data further indicate that the effects of intercompartmental water exchange often play an important role in DCE time-course data modeling, especially for protocols optimized for post-CR SNR.

[1]  D. Donoho,et al.  Sparse MRI: The application of compressed sensing for rapid MR imaging , 2007, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[2]  N. Rofsky,et al.  Combined T2* and T1 measurements for improved perfusion and permeability studies in high field using dynamic contrast enhancement , 2006, European Radiology.

[3]  Huanzhou Yu,et al.  Relaxation times of breast tissue at 1.5T and 3T measured using IDEAL , 2006, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[4]  D. Parker,et al.  Uncertainty and bias in contrast concentration measurements using spoiled gradient echo pulse sequences , 2008, Physics in medicine and biology.

[5]  Thomas E Yankeelov,et al.  Variation of the relaxographic “shutter‐speed” for transcytolemmal water exchange affects the CR bolus‐tracking curve shape , 2003, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[6]  Wei Huang,et al.  Dynamic NMR effects in breast cancer dynamic-contrast-enhanced MRI , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[7]  B R Rosen,et al.  Improving MR quantification of regional blood volume with intravascular T1 contrast agents: Accuracy, precision, and water exchange , 1996, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[8]  E. McVeigh,et al.  Signal‐to‐noise measurements in magnitude images from NMR phased arrays , 1997 .

[9]  Robin M Heidemann,et al.  Generalized autocalibrating partially parallel acquisitions (GRAPPA) , 2002, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[10]  Wei Huang,et al.  Discrimination of benign and malignant breast lesions by using shutter-speed dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. , 2011, Radiology.

[11]  G. Laub,et al.  syngo TWIST for Dynamic Time-Resolved MR Angiography , 2006 .

[12]  P. Roemer,et al.  The NMR phased array , 1990, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[13]  Wei Huang,et al.  The magnetic resonance shutter speed discriminates vascular properties of malignant and benign breast tumors in vivo , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[14]  W. Edelstein,et al.  A signal-to-noise calibration procedure for NMR imaging systems. , 1984, Medical physics.

[15]  G. Clarke,et al.  Measuring signal-to-noise ratio in partially parallel imaging MRI. , 2011, Medical physics.

[16]  Michael Garwood,et al.  Fast and quiet MRI using a swept radiofrequency. , 2006, Journal of magnetic resonance.

[17]  M. Knopp,et al.  Estimating kinetic parameters from dynamic contrast‐enhanced t1‐weighted MRI of a diffusable tracer: Standardized quantities and symbols , 1999, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[18]  S. Schoenberg,et al.  Measurement of signal‐to‐noise ratios in MR images: Influence of multichannel coils, parallel imaging, and reconstruction filters , 2007, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[19]  R. Henkelman Measurement of signal intensities in the presence of noise in MR images. , 1985, Medical physics.

[20]  D. Beyersdorff,et al.  Simultaneous Quantification of Perfusion and Permeability in the Prostate Using Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging with an Inversion-Prepared Dual-Contrast Sequence , 2009, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[21]  A. Macovski Noise in MRI , 1996, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[22]  Lucy E Kershaw,et al.  Cellular‐interstitial water exchange and its effect on the determination of contrast agent concentration in vivo: Dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI of human internal obturator muscle , 2008, Magnetic resonance in medicine.