Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping of Human Brain at 3T: A Multisite Reproducibility Study

REFERENCES

1. 1.↵
   2. de Rochefort L,
   3. Liu T,
   4. Kressler B, et al

   . Quantitative susceptibility map reconstruction from MR phase data using Bayesian regularization: validation and application to brain imaging. Magn Reson Med 2010;63:194–206

   PubMed
2. 2.↵
   2. Liu T,
   3. Liu J,
   4. de Rochefort L, et al

   . Morphology enabled dipole inversion (MEDI) from a single-angle acquisition: comparison with COSMOS in human brain imaging. Magn Reson Med 2011;66:777–83

   CrossRefPubMed
3. 3.↵
   2. Schweser F,
   3. Deistung A,
   4. Sommer K, et al

   . Toward online reconstruction of quantitative susceptibility maps: superfast dipole inversion. Magn Reson Med 2013;69:1582–94

   PubMed
4. 4.↵
   2. Shmueli K,
   3. de Zwart JA,
   4. van Gelderen P, et al

   . Magnetic susceptibility mapping of brain tissue in vivo using MRI phase data. Magn Reson Med 2009;62:1510–22

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
5. 5.↵
   2. Wharton S,
   3. Schafer A,
   4. Bowtell R

   . Susceptibility mapping in the human brain using threshold-based k-space division. Magn Reson Med 2010;63:1292–304

   CrossRefPubMed
6. 6.↵
   2. Wu B,
   3. Li W,
   4. Guidon A, et al

   . Whole brain susceptibility mapping using compressed sensing. Magn Reson Med 2012;67:137–47

   CrossRefPubMed
7. 7.↵
   2. Bilgic B,
   3. Pfefferbaum A,
   4. Rohlfing T, et al

   . MRI estimates of brain iron concentration in normal aging using quantitative susceptibility mapping. Neuroimage 2012;59:2625–35

   CrossRefPubMed
8. 8.↵
   2. Deistung A,
   3. Schafer A,
   4. Schweser F, et al

   . Toward in vivo histology: a comparison of quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) with magnitude-, phase-, and R2*-imaging at ultra-high magnetic field strength. Neuroimage 2013;65:299–314

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
9. 9.↵
   2. Li W,
   3. Wu B,
   4. Liu C

   . Quantitative susceptibility mapping of human brain reflects spatial variation in tissue composition. Neuroimage 2011;55:1645–56

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
10. 10.↵
    2. Lim IA,
    3. Faria AV,
    4. Li X, et al

    . Human brain atlas for automated region of interest selection in quantitative susceptibility mapping: application to determine iron content in deep gray matter structures. Neuroimage 2013;82:449–69

    CrossRefPubMed
11. 11.↵
    2. Liu J,
    3. Liu T,
    4. de Rochefort L, et al

    . Morphology enabled dipole inversion for quantitative susceptibility mapping using structural consistency between the magnitude image and the susceptibility map. Neuroimage 2012;59:2560–68

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
12. 12.↵
    2. Wu B,
    3. Li W,
    4. Avram AV, et al

    . Fast and tissue-optimized mapping of magnetic susceptibility and T2* with multi-echo and multi-shot spirals. Neuroimage 2012;59:297–305

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    2. Langkammer C,
    3. Schweser F,
    4. Krebs N, et al

    . Quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) as a means to measure brain iron? A post mortem validation study. Neuroimage 2012;62:1593–99

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
14. 14.↵
    2. Zheng W,
    3. Nichol H,
    4. Liu S, et al

    . Measuring iron in the brain using quantitative susceptibility mapping and X-ray fluorescence imaging. Neuroimage 2013;78:68–74

    CrossRefPubMed
15. 15.↵
    2. de Rochefort L,
    3. Brown R,
    4. Prince MR, et al

    . Quantitative MR susceptibility mapping using piece-wise constant regularized inversion of the magnetic field. Magn Reson Med 2008;60:1003–09

    CrossRefPubMed
16. 16.↵
    2. Cusack R,
    3. Papadakis N

    . New robust 3-D phase unwrapping algorithms: application to magnetic field mapping and undistorting echoplanar images. Neuroimage 2002;16:754–64

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
17. 17.↵
    2. Gilbert G,
    3. Savard G,
    4. Bard C, et al

    . Quantitative comparison between a multiecho sequence and a single-echo sequence for susceptibility-weighted phase imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 2012;30:722–30

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    2. Liu T,
    3. Khalidov I,
    4. de Rochefort L, et al

    . A novel background field removal method for MRI using projection onto dipole fields (PDF). NMR Biomed 2011;24:1129–36

    CrossRefPubMed
19. 19.↵
    2. Cheng YC,
    3. Neelavalli J,
    4. Haacke EM

    . Limitations of calculating field distributions and magnetic susceptibilities in MRI using a Fourier based method. Phys Med Boil 2009;54:1169–89

    CrossRef
20. 20.↵
    2. Haacke EM,
    3. Tang J,
    4. Neelavalli J, et al

    . Susceptibility mapping as a means to visualize veins and quantify oxygen saturation. J Magn Reson Imaging 2010;32:663–76

    CrossRefPubMed
21. 21.↵
    2. Liu T,
    3. Spincemaille P,
    4. de Rochefort L, et al

    . Calculation of susceptibility through multiple orientation sampling (COSMOS): a method for conditioning the inverse problem from measured magnetic field map to susceptibility source image in MRI. Magn Reson Med 2009;61:196–204

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    2. Schweser F,
    3. Deistung A,
    4. Lehr BW, et al

    . Quantitative imaging of intrinsic magnetic tissue properties using MRI signal phase: an approach to in vivo brain iron metabolism? Neuroimage 2011;54:2789–807

    CrossRefPubMed
23. 23.↵
    2. Bilgic B,
    3. Chatnuntawech I,
    4. Fan AP, et al

    . Fast image reconstruction with L2-regularization. J Magn Reson Imaging 2014;40:181–91

    CrossRefPubMed
24. 24.↵
    2. Kressler B,
    3. de Rochefort L,
    4. Liu T, et al

    . Nonlinear regularization for per voxel estimation of magnetic susceptibility distributions from MRI field maps. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2010;29:273–81

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
25. 25.↵
    2. Wang S,
    3. Lou M,
    4. Liu T, et al

    . Hematoma volume measurement in gradient echo MRI using quantitative susceptibility mapping. Stroke 2013;44:2315–17

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
26. 26.↵
    2. Wharton S,
    3. Bowtell R

    . Whole-brain susceptibility mapping at high field: a comparison of multiple- and single-orientation methods. Neuroimage 2010;53:515–25

    CrossRefPubMed
27. 27.↵
    2. Liu T,
    3. Wisnieff C,
    4. Lou M, et al

    . Nonlinear formulation of the magnetic field to source relationship for robust quantitative susceptibility mapping. Magn Reson Med 2013;69:467–76

    CrossRefPubMed