Azusa Sakurama1, Yasutaka Fushimi1, Satoshi Nakajima1, Yusuke Yokota1, Sonoko Oshima1, Sayo Otani1, Krishna Pandu Wicaksono1, Tomohisa Okada2, Wei Liu3, and Kaori Togashi1
1Department of Diagnostic Imaging and Nuclear Medicine, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan, 2Human Brain Research Center, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan, 3Siemens Healthineers AG, Shenzhen, China
1Department of Diagnostic Imaging and Nuclear Medicine, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan, 2Human Brain Research Center, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan, 3Siemens Healthineers AG, Shenzhen, China
This comparison study between MPRAGE
with GRAPPA and MPRAGE with Wave-CAIPI has been performed at the clinical MR
scanner. MPRAGE with Wave-CAIPI 3×3 shows relatively good contrast and reliable automated segmentation results despite its short scan time.
Fig. 1. A healthy subject.
Representative images of original MPRAGE and segmented images by using recon-all function of FreeSurfer were shown in Figure 1.
Fig. 3
The correlation of all VOIs between GRAPPA 2×1 and Wave-Caipi 3×3 was 0.991 [0.989 - 0.992].
