PURPOSE: In this work, a new method is described for producing local k-space channel combination kernels using a small amount of low-resolution multichannel calibration data. Additionally, this work describes how these channel combination kernels can be combined with local k-space unaliasing kernels produced by the calibration phase of parallel imaging methods such as GRAPPA, PARS and ARC. METHODS: Experiments were conducted to evaluate both the image quality and computational efficiency of the proposed method compared to a channel-by-channel parallel imaging approach with image-space sum-of-squares channel combination. RESULTS: Results indicate comparable image quality overall, with some very minor differences seen in reduced field-of-view imaging. It was demonstrated that this method enables a speed up in computation time on the order of 3-16X for 32-channel data sets. CONCLUSION: The proposed method enables high quality channel combination to occur earlier in the reconstruction pipeline, reducing computational and memory requirements for image reconstruction.
PURPOSE: In this work, a new method is described for producing local k-space channel combination kernels using a small amount of low-resolution multichannel calibration data. Additionally, this work describes how these channel combination kernels can be combined with local k-space unaliasing kernels produced by the calibration phase of parallel imaging methods such as GRAPPA, PARS and ARC. METHODS: Experiments were conducted to evaluate both the image quality and computational efficiency of the proposed method compared to a channel-by-channel parallel imaging approach with image-space sum-of-squares channel combination. RESULTS: Results indicate comparable image quality overall, with some very minor differences seen in reduced field-of-view imaging. It was demonstrated that this method enables a speed up in computation time on the order of 3-16X for 32-channel data sets. CONCLUSION: The proposed method enables high quality channel combination to occur earlier in the reconstruction pipeline, reducing computational and memory requirements for image reconstruction.
Authors: Charles A McKenzie; Ernest N Yeh; Michael A Ohliger; Mark D Price; Daniel K Sodickson Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2002-03 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Mark A Griswold; Peter M Jakob; Robin M Heidemann; Mathias Nittka; Vladimir Jellus; Jianmin Wang; Berthold Kiefer; Axel Haase Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Christopher J Hardy; Randy O Giaquinto; Joseph E Piel; Kenneth W Rohling; Luca Marinelli; Daniel J Blezek; Eric W Fiveland; Robert D Darrow; Thomas K F Foo Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Mahdi Salmani Rahimi; Frank R Korosec; Kang Wang; James H Holmes; Utaroh Motosugi; Peter Bannas; Scott B Reeder Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2014-03-17 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Stephen J Riederer; Eric A Borisch; Adam T Froemming; Roger C Grimm; Akira Kawashima; Lance A Mynderse; Joshua D Trzasko Journal: Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2017-01-27 Impact factor: 2.546
Authors: Adrienne E Campbell-Washburn; Anthony Z Faranesh; Robert J Lederman; Michael S Hansen Journal: Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am Date: 2015-08-12 Impact factor: 2.266