Martin Ott1, Martin Blaimer2, Felix Breuer2, David Grodzki3, Björn Heismann3, Peter Jakob4. 1. Research Center for Magnetic-Resonance-Bavaria, Am Hubland, 97074, Würzburg, Germany. mott@physik.uni-wuerzburg.de. 2. Research Center for Magnetic-Resonance-Bavaria, Am Hubland, 97074, Würzburg, Germany. 3. Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany. 4. Department of Experimental Physics 5, University of Wuerzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To reduce acoustic noise levels in T 1-weighted and proton-density-weighted turbo spin-echo (TSE) sequences, which typically reach acoustic noise levels up to 100 dB(A) in clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five acoustic noise reduction strategies were combined: (1) gradient ramps and shapes were changed from trapezoidal to triangular, (2) variable-encoding-time imaging was implemented to relax the phase-encoding gradient timing, (3) RF pulses were adapted to avoid the need for reversing the polarity of the slice-rewinding gradient, (4) readout bandwidth was increased to provide more time for gradient activity on other axes, (5) the number of slices per TR was reduced to limit the total gradient activity per unit time. We evaluated the influence of each measure on the acoustic noise level, and conducted in vivo measurements on a healthy volunteer. Sound recordings were taken for comparison. RESULTS: An overall acoustic noise reduction of up to 16.8 dB(A) was obtained by the proposed strategies (1-4) and the acquisition of half the number of slices per TR only. Image quality in terms of SNR and CNR was found to be preserved. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed measures in this study allowed a threefold reduction in the acoustic perception of T 1-weighted and proton-density-weighted TSE sequences compared to a standard TSE-acquisition. This could be achieved without visible degradation of image quality, showing the potential to improve patient comfort and scan acceptability.
OBJECTIVE: To reduce acoustic noise levels in T 1-weighted and proton-density-weighted turbo spin-echo (TSE) sequences, which typically reach acoustic noise levels up to 100 dB(A) in clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five acoustic noise reduction strategies were combined: (1) gradient ramps and shapes were changed from trapezoidal to triangular, (2) variable-encoding-time imaging was implemented to relax the phase-encoding gradient timing, (3) RF pulses were adapted to avoid the need for reversing the polarity of the slice-rewinding gradient, (4) readout bandwidth was increased to provide more time for gradient activity on other axes, (5) the number of slices per TR was reduced to limit the total gradient activity per unit time. We evaluated the influence of each measure on the acoustic noise level, and conducted in vivo measurements on a healthy volunteer. Sound recordings were taken for comparison. RESULTS: An overall acoustic noise reduction of up to 16.8 dB(A) was obtained by the proposed strategies (1-4) and the acquisition of half the number of slices per TR only. Image quality in terms of SNR and CNR was found to be preserved. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed measures in this study allowed a threefold reduction in the acoustic perception of T 1-weighted and proton-density-weighted TSE sequences compared to a standard TSE-acquisition. This could be achieved without visible degradation of image quality, showing the potential to improve patient comfort and scan acceptability.
Authors: William A Edelstein; Robert A Hedeen; Richard P Mallozzi; Sayed Amr El-Hamamsy; Robert A Ackermann; Timothy J Havens Journal: Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2002-02 Impact factor: 2.546
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: Felix A Breuer; Martin Blaimer; Robin M Heidemann; Matthias F Mueller; Mark A Griswold; Peter M Jakob Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2005-03 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Olaf Dietrich; José G Raya; Scott B Reeder; Maximilian F Reiser; Stefan O Schoenberg Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 4.813
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