Cape Town - 2026 ISMRM-ISMRT Annual Meeting and Exhibition
9 May 2026 – 14 May 2026 · Cape Town, South Africa
560-02-011 ISMRM Abstract

Echo Sampling Matters: Impact on Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping Accuracy and Regional Variability in Multiple Sclerosis

Primary: Acquisition & Reconstruction - Quantitative Imaging: head and neck
Secondary: Contrast Mechanisms - Susceptibility/QSM
560-02-011 · New Developments in QSM II · Wednesday, 13 May, 9:15 AM–10:10 AM · Digital Posters Row A
Keywords: Precision & Accuracy Multiple Sclerosis Reproducibility Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping (QSM) Echo Sampling strategy
Accepted
Anne-Lise LE BARS 1, Julien Savatovsky1, Aurélien Hervouin2, Fanny Noury2, Émilie Poirion1
1Imaging department, Hospital Foundation A. de Rothschild, Paris, France
2Univ Rennes, Inserm, LTSI-UMR 1099, 35000 Rennes, France
Presenting Author: Anne-Lise LE BARS

Synopsis

Motivation:
Goals:
Approach:
Results:
Full abstract & presentation

The full text, figures, and any recorded presentation for this abstract are not shown here. Log in if you are a member or registered attendee with access.

Full abstracts, figures, and presentations for Cape Town - 2026 ISMRM-ISMRT Annual Meeting and Exhibition are available to registered attendees. This content becomes freely available to the public roughly two years after the meeting.

To request or purchase access, contact the ISMRM Central Office at info@ismrm.org.

Log in

References

1. X. Montalban et al., « Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: 2024 revisions of the McDonald criteria », Lancet Neurol., vol. 24, no 10, p. 850‑865, oct. 2025, doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(25)00270-4. [doi]
2. A. Hervouin, J. Bézy-Wendling, et F. Noury, « How to accurately quantify brain magnetic susceptibility in the context of Parkinson’s disease: Validation on phantoms and healthy volunteers at 1.5 and 3 T », NMR Biomed., vol. 37, no 11, p. e5182, 2024, doi: 10.1002/nbm.5182. [doi]
3. Q. C. O. Committee et al., « Recommended implementation of quantitative susceptibility mapping for clinical research in the brain: A consensus of the ISMRM electro-magnetic tissue properties study group », Magn. Reson. Med., vol. 91, no 5, p. 1834‑1862, 2024, doi: 10.1002/mrm.30006. [doi]
4. M. J. Cronin, N. Wang, K. S. Decker, H. Wei, W.-Z. Zhu, et C. Liu, « Exploring the origins of TE-dependent QSM measurements in healthy tissue and cerebral microbleeds », NeuroImage, vol. 149, p. 98‑113, avr. 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.01.053. [doi]
5. S. Sood et al., « Echo time-dependent quantitative susceptibility mapping contains information on tissue properties », Magn. Reson. Med., vol. 77, no 5, p. 1946‑1958, 2017, doi: 10.1002/mrm.26281. [doi]
6. V. Bordin, A. Pirastru, N. Bergsland, M. Cazzoli, G. Baselli, et F. Baglio, « Optimal echo times for quantitative susceptibility mapping: A test-retest study on basal ganglia and subcortical brain nuclei », NeuroImage, vol. 278, p. 120272, sept. 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2023.120272. [doi]
7. K.-S. Chan et J. P. Marques, « SEPIA—Susceptibility mapping pipeline tool for phase images », NeuroImage, vol. 227, p. 117611, févr. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.117611. [doi]
8. S. M. Smith, « Fast robust automated brain extraction », Hum. Brain Mapp., vol. 17, no 3, p. 143‑155, nov. 2002, doi: 10.1002/hbm.10062. [doi]
9. M. A. Schofield et Y. Zhu, « Fast phase unwrapping algorithm for interferometric applications », Opt. Lett., vol. 28, no 14, p. 1194‑1196, juill. 2003, doi: 10.1364/OL.28.001194. [doi]
10. S. D. Robinson, K. Bredies, D. Khabipova, B. Dymerska, J. P. Marques, et F. Schweser, « An illustrated comparison of processing methods for MR phase imaging and QSM: combining array coil signals and phase unwrapping », NMR Biomed., vol. 30, no 4, p. e3601, 2017, doi: 10.1002/nbm.3601. [doi]
11. T. Liu et al., « A novel background field removal method for MRI using projection onto dipole fields (PDF) », NMR Biomed., vol. 24, no 9, p. 1129‑1136, 2011, doi: 10.1002/nbm.1670. [doi]
12. T. Liu et al., « Morphology enabled dipole inversion (MEDI) from a single-angle acquisition: Comparison with COSMOS in human brain imaging », Magn. Reson. Med., vol. 66, no 3, p. 777‑783, 2011, doi: 10.1002/mrm.22816. [doi]
13. J. Liu et al., « Morphology enabled dipole inversion for quantitative susceptibility mapping using structural consistency between the magnitude image and the susceptibility map », NeuroImage, vol. 59, no 3, p. 2560‑2568, févr. 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.08.082. [doi]
14. C. Milovic, C. Tejos, J. Silva, K. Shmueli, et P. Irarrazaval, « XSIM: A structural similarity index measure optimized for MRI QSM », Magn. Reson. Med., vol. 93, no 1, p. 411‑421, janv. 2025, doi: 10.1002/mrm.30271. [doi]

Cite this abstract

http://echo.ismrm.org/p/ISMRM2026/560-02-011