Purpose: To assess the performance, in the presence of scanner instabilities, of three dynamic correction methods which integrate ∆B0 mapping into the chemical exchange saturation transfer (CEST) measurement and three established static ∆B0 -correction approaches.
Methods: A homogeneous phantom and five healthy volunteers were scanned with a CEST sequence at 7 T. The in vivo measurements were performed twice: first with unaltered system frequency and again applying frequency shifts during the CEST acquisition. In all cases, retrospective voxel-wise ∆B0 -correction was performed using one intrinsic and two extrinsic [prescans with dual-echo gradient-echo and water saturation shift referencing (WASSR)] static approaches. These were compared with two intrinsic [using phase data directly generated by single-echo or double-echo GRE (gradient-echo) CEST readout (CEST-GRE-2TE)] and one extrinsic [phase from interleaved dual-echo EPI (echo planar imaging) navigator (NAV-EPI-2TE)] dynamic ∆B0 -correction approaches [allowing correction of each Z-spectral point before magnetization transfer ratio asymmetry (MTRasym) analysis].
Results: All three dynamic methods successfully mapped the induced drift. The intrinsic approaches were affected by the CEST labeling near water (∆ω < |0.3| ppm). The MTRasym contrast was distorted by the frequency drift in the brain by up to 0.21%/Hz when static ∆B0 -corrections were applied, whereas the dynamic ∆B0 corrections reduced this to <0.01%/Hz without the need of external scans. The CEST-GRE-2TE and NAV-EPI-2TE resulted in highly consistent MTRasym values with/without drift for all subjects.
Conclusion: Reliable correction of scanner instabilities is essential to establish clinical CEST MRI. The three dynamic approaches presented improved the ∆B0 -correction performance significantly in the presence of frequency drift compared to established static methods. Among them, the self-corrected CEST-GRE-2TE was the most accurate and straightforward to implement.
Keywords: chemical exchange saturation transfer (CEST); dynamic ∆B0 correction; frequency drift; scanner instabilities; ∆B0 mapping.
© 2019 The Authors Magnetic Resonance in Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine.