Keywords: Susceptibility/QSM, Susceptibility, background fields
Motivation: Residual background fields in QSM reduce the accuracy of susceptibility reconstructions, making it crucial to evaluate the performance of different algorithms in managing these artifacts.
Goal(s): Compares the robustness of traditional iterative and Deep Learning-based QSM algorithms in the presence of residual background fields to determine which provides the most reliable reconstructions.
Approach: We applied three background field removal methods to simulated data and tested various QSM algorithms, measuring reconstruction error and variance across methods.
Results: Iterative methods, especially WH-QSM, outperformed Deep Learning approaches, showing lower error and more consistent results across local field estimations. Across methods, LBV produced the best reconstructions.
Impact: This study highlights the limitations of current Deep Learning-based QSM algorithms in handling residual background fields, suggesting a need for improved training strategies. It provides insights into which methods offer more reliable susceptibility maps, guiding future QSM development and applications.
How to access this content:
For one year after publication, abstracts and videos are only open to registrants of this annual meeting. Registrants should use their existing login information. Non-registrant access can be purchased via the ISMRM E-Library.
After one year, current ISMRM & ISMRT members get free access to both the abstracts and videos. Non-members and non-registrants must purchase access via the ISMRM E-Library.
After two years, the meeting proceedings (abstracts) are opened to the public and require no login information. Videos remain behind password for access by members, registrants and E-Library customers.
Keywords