ArticleJournal of imaging2025
Recovery and Characterization of Tissue Properties from Magnetic Resonance Fingerprinting with Exchange.
Article in Journal of imaging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Magnetic resonance fingerprinting (MRF), a quantitative MRI technique, enables the acquisition of multiple tissue properties in a single scan. In this paper, we study a proposed extension of MRF, MRF with exchange (MRF-X), which can enable acquisition of the six tissue properties T1a,T2a, T1b, T2b, ρ and τ simultaneously. In MRF-X, 'a' and 'b' refer to distinct compartments modeled in each voxel, while ρ is the fractional volume of component 'a', and τ is the exchange rate of protons between the two components. To assess the feasibility of recovering these properties, we first empirically characterize a similarity metric between MRF and MRF-X reconstructed tissue property values and known reference property values for candidate signals. Our characterization indicates that such a recovery is possible, although the similarity metric surface across the candidate tissue properties is less structured for MRF-X than for MRF. We then investigate the application of different optimization techniques to recover tissue properties from noisy MRF and MRF-X data. Previous work has widely utilized template dictionary-based approaches in the context of MRF; however, such approaches are infeasible with MRF-X. Our results show that Simplicial Homology Global Optimization (SHGO), a global optimization algorithm, and Limited-memory Bryoden-Fletcher-Goldfarb-Shanno algorithm with Bounds (L-BFGS-B), a local optimization algorithm, performed comparably with direct matching in two-tissue property MRF at an SNR of 5. These optimization methods also successfully recovered five tissue properties from MRF-X data. However, with the current pulse sequence and reconstruction approach, recovering all six tissue properties remains challenging for all the methods investigated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.