Meeting Banner
Abstract #2241

Comparison of GRAPPA Acquisition Methods for Whole Body Diffusion Weighted Imaging

Sarah A Mason 1 , Matthew D Blackledge 1 , David J Collins 1 , Thorsten Feiweier 2 , Yiliang Thian 1 , Dow-Mu Koh 1 , and Martin O Leach 1

1 CR-UK and EPSRC Cancer Imaging Centre, Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton, Surrey, United Kingdom, 2 Healthcare Sector, Siemens AG, Erlangen, Germany

We investigated how the technical differences between ss-EPI(R=2), FLASH(R=2) and FLASH(R=3) ACS acquisition methods visually manifest themselves in the context of WBDWI imaging. We analyzed: geometric distortion, SNR, overall image quality, and inter-station registration. FLASH(R=3) had the highest geometric fidelity, fewer image artifacts, and good station-station alignment. These advantages are offset by a lower SNR of ~17%: this may be partially responsible for the tendency of FLASH(R=2) ACS data to be rated higher than FLASH(R = 3) ACS data in terms of overall MIP quality. There was no situation in this study in which ss-EPI outperformed FLASH.

This abstract and the presentation materials are available to members only; a login is required.

Join Here