Advanced MRA rendering techniques: A pictorial review
Applied Radiology — Vol. 31 , Issue 5 , pp. 18 -28
DOI: 10.37549/AR1094
Published: May 1, 2002
Categories
Magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) is typically rendered with whole volume maximum intensity projection (MIP) techniques. While ubiquitously available, user-friendly, and essentially automatic, MIP depiction is not ideal for all circumstances. Many of the shortcomings of MRA are attributable to conventional MIP rendering, rather than the limitations of the MR scan acquisition technique. Utilization of advanced rendering techniques, such as limited volume MIP, hard thresholded three-dimensional (3D), and volume-rendering, can improve the accuracy and acceptance of MRA in clinical practice.
Two-dimensional rendering
Maximum intensity projection
Two-dimensional (2D) projection and 3D rendering of MR (and computed tomography [CT]) source images are accomplished with a variety of techniques. The most commonly used is maximum intensity projection. With MIP techniques, a ray tracing is created in which the highest intensity pixels along the ray are depicted in a 2D fashion and intensities below an arbitrary threshold are eliminated. MIP algorithms determine the threshold for inclusion by considering the full range of intensities in the imaging volume, including quality signal and (interfering) noise (figure 1). All information included in the model is rendered at the same opacity—residual noise is as conspicuous as anatomy. Benefits of MIP rendering include rapid essentially automatic reconstruction with minimal operator input and dependence.
While dynamic range is limited on MR MIP images, rendering of CT data does produce projections that reflect the inherent relative gray scale (Hounsfield units) of the source images. This allows calcified plaques to appear more intense than the contrast-opacified vessel lumen. Since MIP creates 2D depictions, projections must be created over 180° to integrate 3D information fully (figure 2).
MIP rendering is limited in areas of vascular overlap since there is no summation information. This potential for partial obscuration can limit evaluation of complex and tortuous anatomy, such as the circle of Willis and aortic branch vessels.
Limited volume MIP
Limiting the volume under consideration can improve pixel selection and enhance the accuracy of maximum intensity pixel projection. The ability to create a “scalpel” or freehand trace circumscribing regions of anatomy for inclusion or exclusion in the model is widely available and commonly employed. Isolating individual structures under evaluation, eg, a single carotid artery on an MRA of the neck both improves the accuracy of rendering and reduces overlap with adjacent structures (figure 3). In some circumstances with complex, overlapping, tortuous anatomy, or combined venous and arterial enhancement (as well as close proximity to bone on CT), isolation of the structures of interest in a volume may be extremely time consuming and problematic.
OLIVE MIP
Overlapping, limited volume (OLIVE) MIP rendering can overcome many of the limitations of full-volume and regionally circumscribed MIP. These studies, also known as “sliding thin-slab MIPs” or “multiplanar volume reformations” (MPVR) are essentially a hybrid between multiplanar reformation and MIP. Limiting the volume improves the integrity of MIP and limits overlap from adjacent vascular (and on CT, bony) structures1,2 (figures 4 and 5).

Narrow interval, overlapping sub-volume MIP slabs offer a valuable tomographic assessment augmenting critical evaluation of intracranial pathology such as aneurysm, and vascular malformation as well aortic pathology such as dissection and aneurysm using both MR and CT data sets (figures 6 and 7).

While many advocate interrogation of source images for similar reasons, employing thicker slabs with MIP processing provides useful information about vascular structures in the proximity and a more realistic depiction of anatomy. As opposed to single-pixel thick source and thin section unrendered reformat images, OLIVE MIPs typically have greater appeal to referring clinicians (figure 8).
Three-dimensional rendering
Two-dimensional MR (and CT) source data can also be rendered with 3D techniques. Three-dimensional rendering requires operator-specified determination of the range of intensities (or on CT, densities) that will contribute to or be eliminated from the model. The thresholding procedure removes undesirable information from the data set such as noise (and bone on CT) by virtue of intensity (and density on CT) and allows a greater range of rendering possibilities. Traditional 3D techniques require “hard-thresholding” in which ranges are excluded “permanently” from the data set at the onset of model manipulation. Rendering options include shaded-surface display (SSD), ray sum, and MIP.2,3
Shaded-surface display offers an extremely dynamic rendering, corresponding closely to superficial features of the anatomy under study (figure 9). This has the greatest application in the depiction of vascular disease, such as aneurysms of the intracranial vasculature and thoraco-abdominal aorta. While appropriate for the depiction of vascular stenosis with MR data, the process of thresholding can affect accuracy and the information provided should be interpreted with caution. Because calcified plaque and contrast opacified blood fall into a similar density range on CT, SSD is an inappropriate technique to depict stenosis with CTA.
Thresholding-based removal of unwanted intensities before application of MIP algorithms has the benefit of eliminating information such as noise, hemorrhage, and fat that ordinarily may maintain sufficient intensity and manifest on projected images. The resultant MIP renderings are typically more dramatic and appealing to referring physicians (figure 10). CTA data is improved by the removal of bone that can obscure pathology in the brain, body, and extremities.
Thresholded data sets can be rendered with a technique that is a variation on MIP called ray sum. Similar to MIP, this 2D ray tracing also requires viewing of multiple projections to obtain a complete depiction of anatomy. Ray-sum techniques offer a summation of maximum intensities along the traced ray. As a result, when structures overlap there is an increase in depicted opacity (figures 11 and 12). This type of rendition is very similar to that provided by traditional radiographic angiography studies and is superior to MIP in depicting complex vascular anatomy and thrombus.

Thresholding a data set before rendering introduces the very significant factor of operator dependency into the imaging process, however. Constant vigilance to avoid overzealous processing in the effort to reduce background information (or remove bone on CT) is essential to maintain model accuracy (figure 13). Because of the potential for operator error, thresholded renderings are best utilized as a supplement to, rather than a replacement for, traditional, non-thresholded MIP techniques.
Volume rendering
More recently, volume-rendering techniques have become available that allow integration of the full range of image data and depiction with variable opacity. Traditional, non-thresholded, whole-volume MIP is a form of volume rendering in which only the brightest pixels have been rendered opaque. Unlike traditional “hard” thresholded 3D techniques, which require removal of unwanted ranges, volume-rendering techniques allow all ranges to remain within the model under study.4,5
The operator is presented with a menu of preset rendering options under which intensity (and density) ranges have been designated a variable opacity (figures 14 through 19).





Since thresholding is “soft,” creative model manipulation is rapid and interactive, providing the best possible dynamic display of pathology and anatomy.
Initially advocated for CTA data, these techniques offer significant benefits when rendering MRA. Renderings with features of hard-thresholded SSD, MIP, and ray sum can be created separately or in combination on a free-standing workstation (figures 19 and 20). Hard- and soft-thresholding techniques can also be used in combination to facilitate display.
Recently, automated bone segmentation algorithms have become available that facilitate bone removal. Alternatively, bone information can be superimposed on the completed vascular model to provide useful localization information (figure 21).
Conclusion
Utilization of advanced rendering techniques can overcome many of the limitations of traditional, full-volume MIP techniques. Enriching the display of MRA (and CTA) improves clinical acceptance and increases utilization. Employed appropriately, with awareness of their strengths and weaknesses, advanced rendering techniques can improve quality and accuracy. AR
References
- Napel S, Rubin G, Jeffrey R. STS-MIP: A new reconstruction technique for CT of the chest.. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1993;17:832-838.
- Remy-Jardin M, Bonnel F, Mason P, Remy J. Reconstruction techniques in spiral CT angiography.. J Radiol.. 1999:988-997.
- Huber A, Matzko M, Wintersperger B, Reiser M. Reconstruction methods in postprocessing of CT- and MR-angiography of the aorta.. Radiologe.. 2001;41:689-694.
- Verhoek G, Costello P, Khoo E. Carotid bifurcation CT angiography: Assessment of interactive volume rendering.. J Comput Assist Tomogr.. 1999;3:590-596.
- Tsuchiya K, Katase S, Yoshino A. Preliminary evaluation of volume rendered three-dimensional display of time-of-flight angiography in the diagnosis of intracranial aneurysms.. Neuroradiology. 2001;43:633-636.
Citation
. Advanced MRA rendering techniques: A pictorial review. Applied Radiology. 2002;31(5):18-28. doi:10.37549/AR1094.