» Articles » PMID: 32864537

Magnetic Resonance Fingerprinting: Implications and Opportunities for PET/MR

Overview
Publisher IEEE
Date 2020 Sep 1
PMID 32864537
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) can be used to assess anatomical structure, and its sensitivity to a variety of tissue properties enables superb contrast between tissues as well as the ability to characterize these tissues. However, despite vast potential for quantitative and functional evaluation, MRI is typically used qualitatively, in which the underlying tissue properties are not measured, and thus the brightness of each pixel is not quantitatively meaningful. Positron Emission Tomography (PET) is an inherently quantitative imaging modality that interrogates functional activity within a tissue, probed by a molecule of interest coupled with an appropriate tracer. These modalities can complement one another to provide clinical information regarding both structure and function, but there are still technical and practical hurdles in the way of the integrated use of both modalities. Recent advances in MRI have moved the field in an increasingly quantitative direction, which is complementary to PET, and could also potentially help solve some of the challenges in PET/MR. Magnetic Resonance Fingerprinting (MRF) is a recently described MRI-based technique which can efficiently and simultaneously quantitatively map several tissue properties in a single exam. Here, the basic principles behind the quantitative approach of MRF are laid out, and the potential implications for combined PET/MR are discussed.

Citing Articles

Diagnostic and Therapeutic Issues in Glioma Using Imaging Data: The Challenge of Numerical Twinning.

Guillevin R, Naudin M, Fayolle P, Giraud C, Le Guillou X, Thomas C J Clin Med. 2023; 12(24).

PMID: 38137775 PMC: 10744312. DOI: 10.3390/jcm12247706.


Multicenter Repeatability and Reproducibility of MR Fingerprinting in Phantoms and in Prostatic Tissue.

Lo W, Bittencourt L, Panda A, Jiang Y, Tokuda J, Seethamraju R Magn Reson Med. 2022; 88(4):1818-1827.

PMID: 35713379 PMC: 9469467. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.29264.


Feasibility of Quantitative Magnetic Resonance Fingerprinting in Ovarian Tumors for T and T Mapping in a PET/MR Setting.

Kaggie J, Deen S, Kessler D, McLean M, Buonincontri G, Schulte R IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci. 2020; 3(4):509-515.

PMID: 32066996 PMC: 7025887. DOI: 10.1109/TRPMS.2019.2905366.

References
1.
Asslander J, Glaser S, Hennig J . Pseudo Steady-State Free Precession for MR-Fingerprinting. Magn Reson Med. 2016; 77(3):1151-1161. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.26202. View

2.
Park C, Choi E, Kwon H, Hong B, Lee B, Yoon Y . Quantitative T2 mapping for detecting myocardial edema after reperfusion of myocardial infarction: validation and comparison with T2-weighted images. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013; 29 Suppl 1:65-72. DOI: 10.1007/s10554-013-0256-0. View

3.
Hong T, Han D, Kim M, Kim D . RF slice profile effects in magnetic resonance fingerprinting. Magn Reson Imaging. 2017; 41:73-79. DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2017.04.001. View

4.
Cohen O, Zhu B, Rosen M . MR fingerprinting Deep RecOnstruction NEtwork (DRONE). Magn Reson Med. 2018; 80(3):885-894. PMC: 5980718. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.27198. View

5.
Sekine T, Ter Voert E, Warnock G, Buck A, Huellner M, Veit-Haibach P . Clinical Evaluation of Zero-Echo-Time Attenuation Correction for Brain 18F-FDG PET/MRI: Comparison with Atlas Attenuation Correction. J Nucl Med. 2016; 57(12):1927-1932. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.116.175398. View