
PurposeTo investigate the effect of stretching sampling window on quantitative 3D ultrashort TE (UTE) imaging of cortical bone at 3 T.MethodsTen bovine cortical bone and 17 human tibial midshaft samples were imaged with a 3T clinical MRI scanner using an 8‐channel knee coil. Quantitative 3D UTE imaging biomarkers, including T1, , magnetization transfer ratio and magnetization transfer modeling, were performed using radial or spiral Cones sampling trajectories with various durations. Errors in UTE‐MRI biomarkers as a function of sampling time were evaluated using radial sampling as a reference standard.ResultsFor both bovine and human cortical bone samples, no significant differences were observed for all UTE biomarkers (single‐component , bicomponent and relative fractions, T1, magnetization transfer ratio, and magnetization transfer modeling of macromolecular fraction) for spiral sampling windows of 992 µs to 1600 µs compared with a radial sampling window of 688 µs.ConclusionThe total scan time can be reduced by 76% with quantification errors less than 5%. Quantitative UTE‐MRI techniques can be greatly accelerated using longer sampling windows without significant quantification errors.
Adult, Male, cortical bone, Biomedical Engineering, Imaging, Rare Diseases, Imaging, Three-Dimensional, quantitative, Clinical Research, 80 and over, Cortical Bone, Animals, Humans, UTE imaging, sampling window, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Tibia, Middle Aged, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Nuclear Medicine & Medical Imaging, Three-Dimensional, Biomedical Imaging, Cattle, Female, Algorithms
Adult, Male, cortical bone, Biomedical Engineering, Imaging, Rare Diseases, Imaging, Three-Dimensional, quantitative, Clinical Research, 80 and over, Cortical Bone, Animals, Humans, UTE imaging, sampling window, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Tibia, Middle Aged, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Nuclear Medicine & Medical Imaging, Three-Dimensional, Biomedical Imaging, Cattle, Female, Algorithms
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 36 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
