Comparison of uniform‐density, variable‐density, and dual‐density spiral samplings for multi‐shot DWI
Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, vol. 90, pp. 133–149
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the performances of uniform-density spiral (UDS), variable-density spiral (VDS), and dual-density spiral (DDS) samplings in multi-shot diffusion imaging, and determine a sampling strategy that balances reliability of shot navigator and overall DWI image quality. THEORY AND METHODS: UDS, VDS, and DDS trajectories were implemented to achieve four-shot diffusion-weighted spiral imaging. First, the static B0 off-resonance effects in UDS, VDS, and DDS acquisitions were analyzed based on a signal model. Then, in vivo experiments were performed to verify the theoretical analyses, and fractional anisotropy (FA) fitting residuals were used to quantitatively assess the quality of spiral diffusion data for tensor estimation. Finally, the SNR performances and g-factor behavior of the three spiral samplings were evaluated using a Monte Carlo-based pseudo multiple replica method. RESULTS: Among the three spiral trajectories with the same readout duration, UDS sampling exhibited the least off-resonance artifacts. This was most evident when the static B0 off-resonance effect was severe. The UDS diffusion images had higher anatomical fidelity and lower FA fitting residuals than the other two counterparts. Furthermore, the four-shot UDS acquisition achieved the best SNR performance in diffusion imaging with 12.11% and 40.85% improvements over the VDS and DDS acquisitions with the same readout duration, respectively. CONCLUSION: UDS sampling is an efficient spiral acquisition scheme for high-resolution diffusion imaging with reliable navigator information. It provides superior off-resonance performance and SNR efficiency over the VDS and DDS samplings for the tested scenarios.
Authors 7
-
Affiliation as printed
Center for Biomedical Imaging Research, Department of Biomedical Engineering Tsinghua University Beijing China
Center for Biomedical Imaging Research, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
-
Affiliation as printed
Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences University of Utah Salt Lake City Utah USA
Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
-
Affiliation as printed
Center for Biomedical Imaging Research, Department of Biomedical Engineering Tsinghua University Beijing China
Center for Biomedical Imaging Research, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
-
Affiliation as printed
Center for Biomedical Imaging Research, Department of Biomedical Engineering Tsinghua University Beijing China
Center for Biomedical Imaging Research, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
-
Leiden University Medical Center · Philips (Germany)
Affiliation as printed
Philips Research Hamburg Germany
Radiology, C.J. Gorter Center for High‐Field MRI Leiden University Medical Center Leiden The Netherlands
Philips Research, Hamburg, Germany
Radiology, C.J. Gorter Center for High-Field MRI, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
-
University of Illinois Chicago
Affiliation as printed
Center for MR Research and Departments of Radiology, Neurosurgery, and Biomedical Engineering University of Illinois College of Medicine at Chicago Chicago Illinois USA
Center for MR Research and Departments of Radiology, Neurosurgery, and Biomedical Engineering, University of Illinois College of Medicine at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA
-
Hua Guo corresponding
Affiliation as printed
Center for Biomedical Imaging Research, Department of Biomedical Engineering Tsinghua University Beijing China
Center for Biomedical Imaging Research, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
Cited by 3 stored of 3
3 results
No patents citing this paper on Lens.org (checked 2026-10-11).