Analysis of multiple‐acquisition SSFP

Refocused steady‐state free precession (SSFP) is limited by its high sensitivity to local field variation, particularly at high field strengths or the long repetition times (TRs) necessary for high resolution. Several methods have been proposed to reduce SSFP banding artifact by combining multiple phase‐cycled SSFP acquisitions, each differing in how individual signal magnitudes and phases are combined. These include maximum‐intensity SSFP (MI‐SSFP) and complex‐sum SSFP (CS‐SSFP). The reduction in SSFP banding is accompanied by a loss in signal‐to‐noise ratio (SNR) efficiency. In this work a general framework for analyzing banding artifact reduction, contrast, and SNR of any multiple‐acquisition SSFP combination method is presented. A new sum‐of‐squares method is proposed, and a comparison is performed between each of the combination schemes. The sum‐of‐squares SSFP technique (SOS‐SSFP) delivers both robust banding artifact reduction and higher SNR efficiency than other multiple‐acquisition techniques, while preserving SSFP contrast. Magn Reson Med 51:1038–1047, 2004. © 2004 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

[1]  P. Bendel,et al.  An analysis of fast imaging sequences with steady‐state transverse magnetization refocusing , 1988, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[2]  M Deimling,et al.  Constructive interference in steady state-3DFT MR imaging of the inner ear and cerebellopontine angle. , 1993, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

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

[4]  K. Scheffler,et al.  Magnetization preparation during the steady state: Fat‐saturated 3D TrueFISP , 2001, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[5]  E M Haacke,et al.  Steady-state free precession imaging in the presence of motion: application for improved visualization of the cerebrospinal fluid. , 1990, Radiology.

[6]  D G Nishimura,et al.  Linear combination steady‐state free precession MRI , 2000, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[7]  D L Foxall,et al.  Frequency‐modulated steady‐state free precession imaging , 2002, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[8]  Richard B. Buxton,et al.  Signal intensity in fast NMR imaging with short repetition times , 1989 .

[9]  R. Freeman,et al.  Phase and intensity anomalies in fourier transform NMR , 1971 .

[10]  R M Henkelman,et al.  Image resolution and signal-to-noise ratio requirements for MR imaging of degenerative cartilage. , 1997, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[11]  H. Carr STEADY-STATE FREE PRECESSION IN NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE , 1958 .

[12]  J S Lewin,et al.  Invited. Remember true FISP? a high SNR, near 1‐second imaging method for T2‐like contrast in interventional MRI at .2 T , 1998, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[13]  D G Nishimura,et al.  Fluctuating equilibrium MRI , 1999, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[14]  A Schwenk,et al.  NMR pulse technique with high sensitivity for slowly relaxing systems , 1971 .

[15]  M. L. Wood,et al.  Motion‐insensitive, steady‐state free precession imaging , 1990, Magnetic resonance in medicine.