PURPOSE: To design, construct, and validate a semiflexible 64-channel receive-only phased array for pediatric body MRI at 3T. METHODS: A 64-channel receive-only phased array was developed and constructed. The designed flexible coil can easily conform to different patient sizes with nonoverlapping coil elements in the transverse plane. It can cover a field of view of up to 44 × 28 cm(2) and removes the need for coil repositioning for body MRI patients with multiple clinical concerns. The 64-channel coil was compared with a 32-channel standard coil for signal-to-noise ratio and parallel imaging performances on different phantoms. With IRB approval and informed consent/assent, the designed coil was validated on 21 consecutive pediatric patients. RESULTS: The pediatric coil provided higher signal-to-noise ratio than the standard coil on different phantoms, with the averaged signal-to-noise ratio gain at least 23% over a depth of 7 cm along the cross-section of phantoms. It also achieved better parallel imaging performance under moderate acceleration factors. Good image quality (average score 4.6 out of 5) was achieved using the developed pediatric coil in the clinical studies. CONCLUSION: A 64-channel semiflexible receive-only phased array has been developed and validated to facilitate high quality pediatric body MRI at 3T. Magn Reson Med 76:1015-1021, 2016.
PURPOSE: To design, construct, and validate a semiflexible 64-channel receive-only phased array for pediatric body MRI at 3T. METHODS: A 64-channel receive-only phased array was developed and constructed. The designed flexible coil can easily conform to different patient sizes with nonoverlapping coil elements in the transverse plane. It can cover a field of view of up to 44 × 28 cm(2) and removes the need for coil repositioning for body MRI patients with multiple clinical concerns. The 64-channel coil was compared with a 32-channel standard coil for signal-to-noise ratio and parallel imaging performances on different phantoms. With IRB approval and informed consent/assent, the designed coil was validated on 21 consecutive pediatric patients. RESULTS: The pediatric coil provided higher signal-to-noise ratio than the standard coil on different phantoms, with the averaged signal-to-noise ratio gain at least 23% over a depth of 7 cm along the cross-section of phantoms. It also achieved better parallel imaging performance under moderate acceleration factors. Good image quality (average score 4.6 out of 5) was achieved using the developed pediatric coil in the clinical studies. CONCLUSION: A 64-channel semiflexible receive-only phased array has been developed and validated to facilitate high quality pediatric body MRI at 3T. Magn Reson Med 76:1015-1021, 2016.
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: Andreas Graessl; Wolfgang Renz; Fabian Hezel; Matthias A Dieringer; Lukas Winter; Celal Oezerdem; Jan Rieger; Peter Kellman; Davide Santoro; Tomasz D Lindel; Tobias Frauenrath; Harald Pfeiffer; Thoralf Niendorf Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2013-07-31 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Philip M Robson; Aaron K Grant; Ananth J Madhuranthakam; Riccardo Lattanzi; Daniel K Sodickson; Charles A McKenzie Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2008-10 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Martin Uecker; Peng Lai; Mark J Murphy; Patrick Virtue; Michael Elad; John M Pauly; Shreyas S Vasanawala; Michael Lustig Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Jean A Tkach; Stephanie L Merhar; Beth M Kline-Fath; Ronald G Pratt; Wolfgang M Loew; Barret R Daniels; Randy O Giaquinto; Mantosh S Rattan; Blaise V Jones; Michael D Taylor; Janice M Tiefermann; Lisa M Tully; E Colleen Murphy; Rachel N Wolf-Severs; Angela A LaRuffa; Charles L Dumoulin Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2014-01 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Arshad Zaman; Manish Motwani; James J Oliver; Gerard Crelier; Laura E Dobson; David M Higgins; Sven Plein; John P Greenwood Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2014-12-02 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Kamal Aggarwal; Kiran R Joshi; Yashar Rajavi; Mazhareddin Taghivand; John M Pauly; Ada S Y Poon; Greig Scott Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2016-10-27 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: Kelly Byron; Fraser Robb; Pascal Stang; Shreyas Vasanawala; John Pauly; Greig Scott Journal: Concepts Magn Reson Part B Magn Reson Eng Date: 2018-02-14 Impact factor: 1.176
Authors: Maddy Artunduaga; C Amber Liu; Cara E Morin; Suraj D Serai; Unni Udayasankar; Mary-Louise C Greer; Michael S Gee Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2021-04-16