Performance of receive head arrays versus ultimate intrinsic SNR at 7 T and 10.5 T.
electromagnetic models
multichannel receive array
ultimate intrinsic signal‐to‐noise ratio
ultrahigh field MRI
Journal
Magnetic resonance in medicine
ISSN: 1522-2594
Titre abrégé: Magn Reson Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8505245
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
22 Apr 2024
22 Apr 2024
Historique:
revised:
26
02
2024
received:
19
12
2023
accepted:
21
03
2024
medline:
23
4
2024
pubmed:
23
4
2024
entrez:
22
4
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
We examined magnetic field dependent SNR gains and ability to capture them with multichannel receive arrays for human head imaging in going from 7 T, the most commonly used ultrahigh magnetic field (UHF) platform at the present, to 10.5 T, which represents the emerging new frontier of >10 T in UHFs. Electromagnetic (EM) models of 31-channel and 63-channel multichannel arrays built for 10.5 T were developed for 10.5 T and 7 T simulations. A 7 T version of the 63-channel array with an identical coil layout was also built. Array performance was evaluated in the EM model using a phantom mimicking the size and electrical properties of the human head and a digital human head model. Experimental data was obtained at 7 T and 10.5 T with the 63-channel array. Ultimate intrinsic SNR (uiSNR) was calculated for the two field strengths using a voxelized cloud of dipoles enclosing the phantom or the digital human head model as a reference to assess the performance of the two arrays and field depended SNR gains. uiSNR calculations in both the phantom and the digital human head model demonstrated SNR gains at 10.5 T relative to 7 T of 2.6 centrally, ˜2 at the location corresponding to the edge of the brain, ˜1.4 at the periphery. The EM models demonstrated that, centrally, both arrays captured ˜90% of the uiSNR at 7 T, but only ˜65% at 10.5 T, leading only to ˜2-fold gain in array SNR in going from 7 to 10.5 T. This trend was also observed experimentally with the 63-channel array capturing a larger fraction of the uiSNR at 7 T compared to 10.5 T, although the percentage of uiSNR captured were slightly lower at both field strengths compared to EM simulation results. Major uiSNR gains are predicted for human head imaging in going from 7 T to 10.5 T, ranging from ˜2-fold at locations corresponding to the edge of the brain to 2.6-fold at the center, corresponding to approximately quadratic increase with the magnetic field. Realistic 31- and 63-channel receive arrays, however, approach the central uiSNR at 7 T, but fail to do so at 10.5 T, suggesting that more coils and/or different type of coils will be needed at 10.5 T and higher magnetic fields.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : NIH HHS
ID : NIH U01 EB025144
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIH HHS
ID : NIH P41 EB017183
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIH HHS
ID : NIH R01 EB024536
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIH HHS
ID : NIH P41 EB027061
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Authors. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine.
Références
Ocali O, Atalar E. Ultimate intrinsic signal‐to‐noise ratio in MRI. Magn Reson Med. 1998;39:462‐473.
Wiesinger F, Boesiger P, Pruessmann KP. Electrodynamics and ultimate SNR in parallel MR imaging. Magn Reson Med. 2004;52:376‐390.
Guerin B, Villena JF, Polimeridis AG, et al. The ultimate signal‐to‐noise ratio in realistic body models. Magn Reson Med. 2016;78:1969‐1980.
Lee HH, Sodickson DK, Lattanzi R. An analytic expression for the ultimate intrinsic SNR in a uniform sphere. Magn Reson Med. 2018;80:2256‐2266.
Schnell W, Renz W, Vester M, Ermert H. Ultimate signal‐to‐noise‐ ratio of surface and body antennas for magnetic resonance imaging. IEEE Trans Antennas Propag. 2000;48:418‐428.
Ohliger MA, Grant AK, Sodickson DK. Ultimate intrinsic signal‐to‐noise ratio for parallel MRI: electromagnetic field considerations. Magn Reson Med. 2003;50:1018‐1030.
De Martino F, Yacoub E, Kemper V, et al. The impact of ultra‐high field MRI on cognitive and computational neuroimaging. Neuroimage. 2018;168:366‐382.
Dumoulin SO, Fracasso A, van der Zwaag W, Siero JCW, Petridou N. Ultra‐high field MRI: advancing systems neuroscience towards mesoscopic human brain function. Neuroimage. 2018;168:345‐357.
Polimeni JR, Uludag K. Neuroimaging with ultra‐high field MRI: present and future. Neuroimage. 2018;168:1‐6.
Yacoub E, Wald LL. Pushing the spatio‐temporal limits of MRI and fMRI. Neuroimage. 2018;164:1‐3.
Ugurbil K. Imaging at ultrahigh magnetic fields: history, challenges, and solutions. Neuroimage. 2018;168:7‐32.
De Cocker LJ, Lindenholz A, Zwanenburg JJ, et al. Clinical vascular imaging in the brain at 7T. Neuroimage. 2018;168:452‐458.
Trattnig S, Springer E, Bogner W, et al. Key clinical benefits of neuroimaging at 7T. Neuroimage. 2018;168:477‐489.
Obusez EC, Lowe M, Oh SH, et al. 7T MR of intracranial pathology: preliminary observations and comparisons to 3T and 1.5T. Neuroimage. 2018;168:459‐476.
Ugurbil K. Magnetic resonance imaging at ultrahigh fields. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2014;61:1364‐1379.
Keil B, Wald LL. Massively parallel MRI detector arrays. J Magn Reson. 2013;229:75‐89.
Vaidya MV, Sodickson DK, Lattanzi R. Approaching ultimate intrinsic SNR in a uniform spherical sample with finite arrays of loop coils. Concepts Magn Reson Part B Magn Reson Eng. 2014;44:53‐65.
Lakshmanan K, Cloos M, Brown R, Lattanzi R, Sodickson DK, Wiggins GC. The "Loopole" antenna: a hybrid coil combining loop and electric dipole properties for ultra‐high‐field MRI. Concepts Magn Reson Part B Magn Reson Eng. 2020;2020:1‐9.
Yan X, Gore JC, Grissom WA. Self‐decoupled radiofrequency coils for magnetic resonance imaging. Nat Commun. 2018;9:3481.
Yan X, Gore JC, Grissom WA. Traveling‐wave meets standing‐wave: a simulation study using pair‐of‐transverse‐dipole‐ring (PTDR) coils for adjustable longitudinal coverage in ultra‐high field MRI. Concepts Magn Reson Part B Magn Reson Eng. 2018;48B(4):e21402. doi:10.1002/cmr.b.21402
Raaijmakers AJ, Ipek O, Klomp DW, et al. Design of a radiative surface coil array element at 7 T: the single‐side adapted dipole antenna. Magn Reson Med. 2011;66:1488‐1497.
Woo MK, DelaBarre L, Waks MT, et al. Evaluation of 8‐channel radiative antenna arrays for human head imaging at 10.5 tesla. Sensors (Basel). 2021;21(18):6000. doi:10.3390/s21186000
Adriany G, Van de Moortele PF, Ritter J, et al. A geometrically adjustable 16‐channel transmit/receive transmission line array for improved RF efficiency and parallel imaging performance at 7 tesla. Magn Reson Med. 2008;59:590‐597.
Grier MD, Yacoub E, Adriany G, et al. Ultra‐high field (10.5T) diffusion‐weighted MRI of the macaque brain. Neuroimage. 2022;255:119200.
He X, Erturk MA, Grant A, et al. First in‐vivo human imaging at 10.5T: imaging the body at 447 MHz. Magn Reson Med. 2020;84:289‐303.
Le Ster C, Grant A, Van de Moortele PF, et al. Magnetic field strength dependent SNR gain at the center of a spherical phantom and up to 11.7T. Magn Reson Med. 2022;88:2131‐2138.
Ugurbil K, Van de Moortele PF, Grant A, et al. Progress in imaging the human torso at the ultrahigh fields of 7 and 10.5 T. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2021;29:e1‐e19.
Yacoub E, Grier MD, Auerbach EJ, et al. Ultra‐high field (10.5 T) resting state fMRI in the macaque. Neuroimage. 2020;223:117349.
Sadeghi‐Tarakameh A, Jungst S, Lanagan M, et al. A nine‐channel transmit/receive array for spine imaging at 10.5 T: Introduction to a nonuniform dielectric substrate antenna. Magn Reson Med. 2022;87:2074‐2088.
Sadeghi‐Tarakameh A, DelaBarre L, Lagore RL, et al. In vivo human head MRI at 10.5T: a radiofrequency safety study and preliminary imaging results. Magn Reson Med. 2020;84:484‐496.
Lattanzi R, Sodickson DK. Ideal current patterns yielding optimal signal‐to‐noise ratio and specific absorption rate in magnetic resonance imaging: computational methods and physical insights. Magn Reson Med. 2012;68:286‐304.
Giannakopoulos II, Guryev GD, Serralles JEC, et al. Compression of volume‐surface integral equation matrices via Tucker decomposition for magnetic resonance applications. IEEE Trans Antennas Propag. 2022;70:459‐471.
Christ A, Kainz W, Hahn EG, et al. The virtual family—development of surface‐based anatomical models of two adults and two children for dosimetric simulations. Phys Med Biol. 2010;55:N23‐N38.
Roemer PB, Edelstein WA, Hayes CE, Souza SP, Mueller OM. The NMR phased array. Magn Reson Med. 1990;16:192‐225.
Lattanzi R, Grant AK, Polimeni JR, et al. Performance evaluation of a 32‐element head array with respect to the ultimate intrinsic SNR. NMR Biomed. 2010;23:142‐151.
Pruessmann KP, Weiger M, Scheidegger MB, Boesiger P. SENSE: sensitivity encoding for fast MRI. Magn Reson Med. 1999;42:952‐962.
Montin E, Wiggins R, Block KT, Lattanzi R. MR optimum – a web‐based application for signal‐to‐noise ratio evaluation. Proc Int Soc. Magn Reson Med. 2019;27:4617.
Georgakis I, Giannakopoulos I, Mikhail S, Athanasios G. A fast volume integral equation solver with linear basis functions for the accurate computation of electromagnetic fields in MRI. IEEE Trans Antennas Propag. 2020;69:13.
Polimeridis AG, Villena JF, Daniel L, White JK. Stable FFT‐JVIE solvers for fast analysis of highly inhomogeneous dielectric objects. J Comput Phys. 2014;269:280‐296.
Georgakis IP, Villena JF, Polimeridis AG, Lattanzi R. Novel numerical basis sets for electromagnetic field expansion in arbitrary inhomogeneous objects. IEEE Trans Antennas Propag. 2022;70:8227‐8241.
Lattanzi R, Wiggins GC, Zhang B, Duan Q, Brown R, Sodickson DK. Approaching ultimate intrinsic signal‐to‐noise ratio with loop and dipole antennas. Magn Reson Med. 2018;79:1789‐1803.
Adriany G, Radder J, Tavaf N, et al. Evaluation of a 16‐Channel Transmitter for Head Imaging at 10.5T. IEEE; 2019 2019/9/12:1171‐1174.
Terman F. Radioengineer's Handbook. Mc Graw Hill; 1943.
Waks M, Tavaf N, Lagore R, et al. Ugurbil K. A 16‐ channel splitable non‐overlapped self‐decoupled loop transmitter for 10.5 tesla human head imaging. Proc Int Soc Mag Reson Med. 2022;4109.
Waks M, Lagore RL, Auerbach E, et al. A self‐decoupled 16‐channel transmit, 80‐channel receive array for 10.5 tesla human head imaging. Proc Int Soc Mag Reson Med. 2023;211.
Ugurbil K, Auerbach E, Moeller S, et al. Brain imaging with improved acceleration and SNR at 7 tesla obtained with 64‐channel receive array. Magn Reson Med. 2019;82:495‐509.
Zaretskaya N. Zooming‐in on higher‐level vision: high‐resolution fMRI for understanding visual perception and awareness. Prog Neurobiol. 2021;207:101998.
Hoult DI, Phil D. Sensitivity and power deposition in a high‐field imaging experiment. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2000;12:46‐67.
Lawrence SJD, Formisano E, Muckli L, de Lange FP. Laminar fMRI: applications for cognitive neuroscience. Neuroimage. 2019;197:785‐791.
Norris DG, Polimeni JR. Laminar (f)MRI: a short history and future prospects. Neuroimage. 2019;197:643‐649.
Weldon KB, Olman CA. Forging a path to mesoscopic imaging success with ultra‐high field functional magnetic resonance imaging. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1815;2021:20200040.
Ugurbil K. What is feasible with imaging human brain function and connectivity using functional magnetic resonance imaging. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2016;371:20150361.
Finn ES, Huber L, Bandettini PA. Higher and deeper: bringing layer fMRI to association cortex. Prog Neurobiol. 2021;207:101930.
Self MW, van Kerkoerle T, Goebel R, Roelfsema PR. Benchmarking laminar fMRI: neuronal spiking and synaptic activity during top‐down and bottom‐up processing in the different layers of cortex. Neuroimage. 2019;197:806‐817.
Poplawsky AJ, Fukuda M, Kim SG. Foundations of layer‐specific fMRI and investigations of neurophysiological activity in the laminarized neocortex and olfactory bulb of animal models. Neuroimage. 2019;199:718‐729.
Jorgenson LA, Newsome WT, Anderson DJ, et al. The BRAIN initiative: developing technology to catalyse neuroscience discovery. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2015;370:20140164.
BRAIN Initiave 2.0: From Cells to Circuits, Toward Cures (BRAIN 2.0). 2019.
Grant A, Metzger GJ, Van de Moortele PF, et al. 10.5 T MRI static field effects on human cognitive, vestibular, and physiological function. Magn Reson Imaging. 2020;73:163‐176.
Yang QX, Wang J, Zhang X, et al. Analysis of wave behavior in lossy dielectric samples at high field. Magn Reson Med. 2002;47:982‐989.
Van de Moortele PF, Akgun C, Adriany G, et al. B(1) destructive interferences and spatial phase patterns at 7 T with a head transceiver array coil. Magn Reson Med. 2005;54:1503‐1518.
Tavaf N, Lagore RL, Jungst S, et al. A self‐decoupled 32‐channel receive array for human‐brain MRI at 10.5 T. Magn Reson Med. 2021;86:1759‐1772.
Tavaf N, Jungst S, Lagore R, et al. A Self‐decoupled 64 channel receive Array for human brain MRI at 10.5T. Proc Int Soc Magn Reson Med. 2021;29:179.
Wiesinger F, Van de Moortele PF, Adriany G, De Zanche N, Ugurbil K, Pruessmann KP. Parallel imaging performance as a function of field strength—an experimental investigation using electrodynamic scaling. Magn Reson Med. 2004;52:953‐964.
Wiesinger F, Van de Moortele PF, Adriany G, De Zanche N, Ugurbil K, Pruessmann KP. Potential and feasibility of parallel MRI at high field. NMR Biomed. 2006;19:368‐378.
Gruber B, Stockmann JP, Mareyam A, et al. A 128‐channel receive array for cortical brain imaging at 7 T. Magn Reson Med. 2023;90:2592‐2607.
Wiggins GC, Polimeni JR, Potthast A, Schmitt M, Alagappan V, Wald LL. 96‐channel receive‐only head coil for 3 tesla: design optimization and evaluation. Magn Reson Med. 2009;62:754‐762.
Avdievich NI, Nikulin AV, Ruhm L, et al. A 32‐element loop/dipole hybrid array for human head imaging at 7 T. Magn Reson Med. 2022;88:1912‐1926.
Sadeghi‐Tarakameh A, Waks M, Grant A, et al. Boosting central head SNR at 10.5T: 32‐channel hybrid RF coil comprised of 25 Rx‐only loops and 7 TxRx NODES dipoles. Proc Int Soc Mag Reson Med. 2023;3913.
Lagore RL, Grant A, DelaBarre L, et al. 128‐channel brain imaging array with improved acceleration at 10.5 tesla. Proc Int Soc Mag Reson Med. 2023;1059.
Vizioli L, Moeller S, Dowdle L, et al. Lowering the thermal noise barrier in functional brain mapping with magnetic resonance imaging. Nat Commun. 2021;12:5181.
Uludag K, Muller‐Bierl B, Ugurbil K. An integrative model for neuronal activity‐induced signal changes for gradient and spin echo functional imaging. Neuroimage. 2009;48:150‐165.
Uludag K, Ugurbil K. Physiology and physics of the fMRI signal. In: Uludag K, Ugurbil K, Berliner L, eds. fMRI: from Nuclear Spins to Brain Function, Biological Magnetic Resonance. Springer; 2015:163‐214.
Ogawa S, Menon RS, Tank DW, et al. Functional brain mapping by blood oxygenation level‐dependent contrast magnetic resonance imaging. A comparison of signal characteristics with a biophysical model. Biophys J. 1993;64:803‐812.