Incomplete spectrum QSM using support information

Introduction Reconstructing a bounded object from incomplete k-space data is a well posed problem, and it was recently shown that this incomplete spectrum approach can be used to reconstruct undersampled MRI images with similar quality to compressed sensing approaches. Here, we apply this incomplete spectrum approach to the field-to-source inverse problem encountered in quantitative magnetic susceptibility mapping (QSM). The field-to-source problem is an ill-posed problem because of conical regions in frequency space where the dipole kernel is zero or very small, which leads to the kernel's inverse being ill-defined. These “ill-posed” regions typically lead to streaking artifacts in QSM reconstructions. In contrast to compressed sensing, our approach relies on knowledge of the image-space support, more commonly referred to as the mask, of our object as well as the region in k-space with ill-defined values. In the QSM case, this mask is usually available, as it is required for most QSM background field removal and reconstruction methods. Methods We tuned the incomplete spectrum method (mask and band-limit) for QSM on a simulated dataset from the most recent QSM challenge and validated the QSM reconstruction results on brain images acquired in five healthy volunteers, comparing incomplete spectrum QSM to current state-of-the art-methods: FANSI, nonlinear dipole inversion, and conventional thresholded k-space division. Results Without additional regularization, incomplete spectrum QSM performs slightly better than direct QSM reconstruction methods such as thresholded k-space division (PSNR of 39.9 vs. 39.4 of TKD on a simulated dataset) and provides susceptibility values in key iron-rich regions similar or slightly lower than state-of-the-art algorithms, but did not improve the PSNR in comparison to FANSI or nonlinear dipole inversion. With added (ℓ1-wavelet based) regularization the new approach produces results similar to compressed sensing based reconstructions (at sufficiently high levels of regularization). Discussion Incomplete spectrum QSM provides a new approach to handle the “ill-posed” regions in the frequency-space data input to QSM.

[1]  W. Jiang,et al.  Age-dependent changes in brain iron deposition and volume in deep gray matter nuclei using quantitative susceptibility mapping , 2023, NeuroImage.

[2]  K. Shmueli,et al.  Investigating the effect of oblique image acquisition on the accuracy of QSM and a robust tilt correction method , 2022, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[3]  P. M. van den Berg,et al.  Inversion of incomplete spectral data using support information with an application to magnetic resonance imaging , 2021, Journal of Physics Communications.

[4]  T. Knopp,et al.  MRIReco.jl: An MRI reconstruction framework written in Julia , 2021, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[5]  José P. Marques,et al.  QSM Reconstruction Challenge 2.0: Design and Report of Results , 2020, bioRxiv.

[6]  C. Langkammer,et al.  QSM Reconstruction Challenge 2.0–Part 1: A Realistic in silico Head Phantom for MRI data simulation and evaluation of susceptibility mapping procedures , 2020, bioRxiv.

[7]  K. Shmueli,et al.  An optimized and highly repeatable MRI acquisition and processing pipeline for quantitative susceptibility mapping in the head‐and‐neck region , 2020, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[8]  Kawin Setsompop,et al.  Nonlinear dipole inversion (NDI) enables robust quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) , 2020, NMR in biomedicine.

[9]  Steffen Bollmann,et al.  Overview of quantitative susceptibility mapping using deep learning: Current status, challenges and opportunities , 2019, NMR in biomedicine.

[10]  Jae Myung Kim,et al.  Exploring linearity of deep neural network trained QSM: QSMnet+ , 2019, NeuroImage.

[11]  Christian Langkammer,et al.  DeepQSM - using deep learning to solve the dipole inversion for quantitative susceptibility mapping , 2019, NeuroImage.

[12]  Shonit Punwani,et al.  The effect of low resolution and coverage on the accuracy of susceptibility mapping , 2018, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[13]  C. Tejos,et al.  Fast nonlinear susceptibility inversion with variational regularization , 2018, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[14]  Chunlei Liu,et al.  Longitudinal atlas for normative human brain development and aging over the lifespan using quantitative susceptibility mapping , 2018, NeuroImage.

[15]  Jin Keun Seo,et al.  Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping (QSM) Algorithms: Mathematical Rationale and Computational Implementations , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[16]  Ferdinand Schweser,et al.  Overview of quantitative susceptibility mapping , 2017, NMR in biomedicine.

[17]  S. Lehéricy,et al.  Reproducibility of R2* and quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) reconstruction methods in the basal ganglia of healthy subjects , 2017, NMR in biomedicine.

[18]  Ferdinand Schweser,et al.  An illustrated comparison of processing methods for phase MRI and QSM: removal of background field contributions from sources outside the region of interest , 2017, NMR in biomedicine.

[19]  Yi Wang,et al.  Quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM): Decoding MRI data for a tissue magnetic biomarker , 2014, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[20]  Christian Langkammer,et al.  Differential developmental trajectories of magnetic susceptibility in human brain gray and white matter over the lifespan , 2014, Human brain mapping.

[21]  L. Younes,et al.  Diffeomorphometry and geodesic positioning systems for human anatomy. , 2014, Technology.

[22]  Ferdinand Schweser,et al.  Toward online reconstruction of quantitative susceptibility maps: Superfast dipole inversion , 2013, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[23]  Pascal Spincemaille,et al.  Nonlinear formulation of the magnetic field to source relationship for robust quantitative susceptibility mapping , 2013, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[24]  Rabab Kreidieh Ward,et al.  On the choice of Compressed Sensing priors and sparsifying transforms for MR image reconstruction: An experimental study , 2012, Signal Process. Image Commun..

[25]  Ferdinand Schweser,et al.  Quantitative susceptibility mapping for investigating subtle susceptibility variations in the human brain , 2012, NeuroImage.

[26]  Jari Korhonen,et al.  Peak signal-to-noise ratio revisited: Is simple beautiful? , 2012, 2012 Fourth International Workshop on Quality of Multimedia Experience.

[27]  Chunlei Liu,et al.  Whole brain susceptibility mapping using compressed sensing , 2012, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[28]  Yi Wang,et al.  A novel background field removal method for MRI using projection onto dipole fields (PDF) , 2011, NMR in biomedicine.

[29]  Torsten Rohlfing,et al.  MRI estimates of brain iron concentration in normal aging using quantitative susceptibility mapping , 2011, NeuroImage.

[30]  J. Duyn,et al.  Magnetic susceptibility mapping of brain tissue in vivo using MRI phase data , 2009, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

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

[32]  Thierry Blu,et al.  Generalized Daubechies Wavelet Families , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing.

[33]  R. Bowtell,et al.  Application of a Fourier‐based method for rapid calculation of field inhomogeneity due to spatial variation of magnetic susceptibility , 2005 .

[34]  Stephen M Smith,et al.  Fast robust automated brain extraction , 2002, Human brain mapping.

[35]  Peter M. van den Berg,et al.  ITERATIVE RECONSTRUCTION OF IMAGES FROM INCOMPLETE SPECTRAL DATA , 1997 .

[36]  A. Papoulis A new algorithm in spectral analysis and band-limited extrapolation. , 1975 .

[37]  B. Fuks,et al.  Introduction to the Theory of Analytic Functions of Several Complex Variables , 1963 .

[38]  C. Moonen,et al.  A fast calculation method for magnetic field inhomogeneity due to an arbitrary distribution of bulk susceptibility , 2003 .

[39]  J. M. Danskin,et al.  Theory of analytic functions of several complex variables , 1963 .