4.5 Article

Using the GRAPPA Operator and the Generalized Sampling Theorem to Reconstruct Undersampled Non-Cartesian Data

Journal

MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICINE
Volume 61, Issue 3, Pages 705-715

Publisher

JOHN WILEY & SONS INC
DOI: 10.1002/mrm.21891

Keywords

parallel imaging; bunched phase encoding; non-Cartesian trajectories; GROG; generalized sampling theorem

Funding

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgerneinschaft [JA 827/4-4]
  2. Siemens AG Medical Solutions

Ask authors/readers for more resources

As expected from the generalized sampling theorem of Papoulis, the use of a bunched sampling acquisition scheme in conjunction with a conjugate gradient (CG) reconstruction algorithm can decrease scan time by reducing the number of phase-encoding lines needed to generate an unaliased image at a given resolution. However, the acquisition of such bunched data requires both modified pulse sequences and high gradient performance. A novel method of generating the bunched data using self-calibrating GRAPPA operator gridding (GROG), a parallel imaging method that shifts data points by small distances in k-space (with Delta k usually less than 1.0, depending on the receiver coil) using the GRAPPA operator, is presented here. With the CG reconstruction method, these additional bunched points can then be used to reconstruct an image with reduced artifacts from undersampled data. This method is referred to as GROG-facilitated bunched phase encoding (BPE), or GROG-BPE. To better understand how the patterns of bunched points, maximal blip size, and number of bunched points affect the reconstruction quality, a number of simulations were performed using the GROG-BPE approach. Finally, to demonstrate that this method can be combined with a variety of trajectories, examples of images with reduced artifacts reconstructed from undersampled in vivo radial, spiral, and rosette data are shown. Magn Reson Med 61:705-715, 2009. (C) 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available