INTRODUCTION: The use of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) for clinical applications and basic neuroscience is constantly increasing. The discussion about minimum performance requirement for a correct implementation of fMRI is still open, and one of the critical points is the magnetic field strength. We tested the feasibility of fMRI at 1.0 T during motor and cognitive tasks. METHODS: Fourteen healthy subjects were scanned during a motor task and 12 while performing the Tower of London task. In the activated areas, the percentage signal change due to BOLD (blood oxygenation level dependent) contrast was analysed. To check basic image quality of the acquisition system we measured quality indices in a temporal series of images of a phantom. RESULTS: Motor and cognitive brain activations matched previous results obtained at higher field strengths. The mean percentage change over subjects in the motor task was in the range 1.3-2.6% for the primary motor area and 0.8-6.7% for the cerebellum. In the cognitive task, the mean percentage change over subjects was 0.7-1.2% for a frontal area and 0.6-2.8% for a parietal area. The percentage noise of the phantom temporal series was less than 0.4%. Percentage changes and signal to noise ratio, although lower than that obtained with high-field systems, allowed activation maps to be obtained in all subjects. CONCLUSION: Our results replicate previous fMRI results demonstrating reproducible motor-related brain activations and extend the field to a complex cognitive task, thus providing evidence of the safety for routine clinical use of 1-T equipment.
INTRODUCTION: The use of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) for clinical applications and basic neuroscience is constantly increasing. The discussion about minimum performance requirement for a correct implementation of fMRI is still open, and one of the critical points is the magnetic field strength. We tested the feasibility of fMRI at 1.0 T during motor and cognitive tasks. METHODS: Fourteen healthy subjects were scanned during a motor task and 12 while performing the Tower of London task. In the activated areas, the percentage signal change due to BOLD (blood oxygenation level dependent) contrast was analysed. To check basic image quality of the acquisition system we measured quality indices in a temporal series of images of a phantom. RESULTS: Motor and cognitive brain activations matched previous results obtained at higher field strengths. The mean percentage change over subjects in the motor task was in the range 1.3-2.6% for the primary motor area and 0.8-6.7% for the cerebellum. In the cognitive task, the mean percentage change over subjects was 0.7-1.2% for a frontal area and 0.6-2.8% for a parietal area. The percentage noise of the phantom temporal series was less than 0.4%. Percentage changes and signal to noise ratio, although lower than that obtained with high-field systems, allowed activation maps to be obtained in all subjects. CONCLUSION: Our results replicate previous fMRI results demonstrating reproducible motor-related brain activations and extend the field to a complex cognitive task, thus providing evidence of the safety for routine clinical use of 1-T equipment.
Authors: K K Kwong; J W Belliveau; D A Chesler; I E Goldberg; R M Weisskoff; B P Poncelet; D N Kennedy; B E Hoppel; M S Cohen; R Turner Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 1992-06-15 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: S C Baker; R D Rogers; A M Owen; C D Frith; R J Dolan; R S Frackowiak; T W Robbins Journal: Neuropsychologia Date: 1996-06 Impact factor: 3.139
Authors: B F van der Kallen; L J van Erning; M W van Zuijlen; H Merx; H O Thijssen Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 1998 Jun-Jul Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: A Lundervold; L Ersland; K I Gjesdal; A I Smievoll; T Tillung; H Sundberg; K Hugdahl Journal: Int J Neurosci Date: 1995-04 Impact factor: 2.292
Authors: S Ogawa; D W Tank; R Menon; J M Ellermann; S G Kim; H Merkle; K Ugurbil Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 1992-07-01 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: E van de Giessen; P F C Groot; J Booij; W van den Brink; D J Veltman; A J Nederveen Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2011-02-17 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Yicun Wang; Peter van Gelderen; Jacco A de Zwart; Adrienne E Campbell-Washburn; Jeff H Duyn Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2021-01-21 Impact factor: 3.737
Authors: Jennifer L Gess; Jennifer S Fausett; Tonisha E Kearney-Ramos; Clinton D Kilts; George Andrew James Journal: Brain Behav Date: 2014-07-09 Impact factor: 2.708