Meeting Banner
Abstract #2388

Validation of T1 Mapping Techniques: Are Phantom Studies Sufficient?

Nikola Stikov1, Ives R. Levesque2, Christine L. Tardif1, Jolle K. Barral3, G Bruce Pike1

1Montreal Neurological Institute, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; 2Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States; 3HeartVista, Inc., Los Altos, CA, United States

T1 mapping is critical for most quantitative MRI, yet there is a large variation of reported values in vivo, an inconsistency that highlights the issue of reproducibility and accuracy. We compare the three most common T1 mapping techniques (Inversion Recovery, Look-Locker and Variable Flip Angle), and show that despite good agreement in phantoms, there is a significant variation in brain T1 values when different techniques are applied to the same healthy subject. We compute the white matter T1 peak in 10 healthy subjects and observe a trend consistent with literature, with Look-Locker underestimating, and VFA overestimating the inversion recovery T1 values. Our findings suggest that phantom studies are not sufficient for validation of T1 mapping techniques.

Abstract PDF Poster PDF

Keywords

accordance accounted accounting accuracy agreement altos analyzed applied aqueous bias biological bottom brain broader calibration channel clipping closest coil commonly composite computed conductivity considerably constant corrected correction critical dependent depending discrepancy distinct double employed employing even example explained facilitate fast female fits fitting gold gradient greater head healthy highlights histogram histograms hold human in vivo incomplete inconsistency individual institute inversion issues kept labeling labels linear literature locker look magnetization male mapping maps mark masked match matched meantime measured media much necessarily needed neurological nonlinear optimal overestimate overestimating overestimation peak peaks phantom phantoms picked pike pooled preparation protocol protocols pulse quantitative readout reasonable receive recovery report reported reproducibility selective shin shot sled slice spin spoiled spoiling still studies subject subjects sufficient summed though tissue transfer trend trio underestimating understand validation variability variable variation variations varied varies vary white whose wright