Ryan Brown1,2,3, Karthik Lakshmanan4,5, Guillaume Madelin4,5, Leeor Alon4,5,6, Gregory Chang4,5, Daniel K Sodickson4,5,6, Ravinder R Regatte4,5, Graham C Wiggins4,5. 1. Bernard and Irene Schwartz Center for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, New York University School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA. ryan.brown@nyumc.org. 2. Center for Advanced Imaging Innovation and Research, Department of Radiology, New York University School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA. ryan.brown@nyumc.org. 3. NYU WIRELESS, Polytechnic Institute of New York University, Brooklyn, New York, USA. ryan.brown@nyumc.org. 4. Bernard and Irene Schwartz Center for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, New York University School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA. 5. Center for Advanced Imaging Innovation and Research, Department of Radiology, New York University School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA. 6. NYU WIRELESS, Polytechnic Institute of New York University, Brooklyn, New York, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We describe a 2 × 6 channel sodium/proton array for knee MRI at 3T. Multielement coil arrays are desirable because of well-known signal-to-noise ratio advantages over volume and single-element coils. However, low tissue-coil coupling that is characteristic of coils operating at low frequency can make the potential gains from a phased array difficult to realize. METHODS: The issue of low tissue-coil coupling in the developed six-channel sodium receive array was addressed by implementing 1) a mechanically flexible former to minimize the coil-to-tissue distance and reduce the overall diameter of the array and 2) a wideband matching scheme that counteracts preamplifier noise degradation caused by coil coupling and a high-quality factor. The sodium array was complemented with a nested proton array to enable standard MRI. RESULTS: The wideband matching scheme and tight-fitting mechanical design contributed to >30% central signal-to-noise ratio gain on the sodium module over a mononuclear sodium birdcage coil, and the performance of the proton module was sufficient for clinical imaging. CONCLUSION: We expect the strategies presented in this study to be generally relevant in high-density receive arrays, particularly in x-nuclei or small animal applications. Magn Reson Med 76:1325-1334, 2016.
PURPOSE: We describe a 2 × 6 channel sodium/proton array for knee MRI at 3T. Multielement coil arrays are desirable because of well-known signal-to-noise ratio advantages over volume and single-element coils. However, low tissue-coil coupling that is characteristic of coils operating at low frequency can make the potential gains from a phased array difficult to realize. METHODS: The issue of low tissue-coil coupling in the developed six-channel sodium receive array was addressed by implementing 1) a mechanically flexible former to minimize the coil-to-tissue distance and reduce the overall diameter of the array and 2) a wideband matching scheme that counteracts preamplifier noise degradation caused by coil coupling and a high-quality factor. The sodium array was complemented with a nested proton array to enable standard MRI. RESULTS: The wideband matching scheme and tight-fitting mechanical design contributed to >30% central signal-to-noise ratio gain on the sodium module over a mononuclear sodium birdcage coil, and the performance of the proton module was sufficient for clinical imaging. CONCLUSION: We expect the strategies presented in this study to be generally relevant in high-density receive arrays, particularly in x-nuclei or small animal applications. Magn Reson Med 76:1325-1334, 2016.
Authors: Armin M Nagel; Frederik B Laun; Marc-André Weber; Christian Matthies; Wolfhard Semmler; Lothar R Schad Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: James G Pipe; Nicholas R Zwart; Eric A Aboussouan; Ryan K Robison; Ajit Devaraj; Kenneth O Johnson Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2011-04-05 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Dennis W J Klomp; Bart L van de Bank; Alexander Raaijmakers; Mies A Korteweg; Cecilia Possanzini; Vincent O Boer; Cornelius A T van de Berg; Maurice A A J van de Bosch; Peter R Luijten Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2011-03-24 Impact factor: 4.044
Authors: Ryan Brown; Guillaume Madelin; Riccardo Lattanzi; Gregory Chang; Ravinder R Regatte; Daniel K Sodickson; Graham C Wiggins Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2012-08-08 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Bei Zhang; Ryan Brown; Martijn Cloos; Riccardo Lattanzi; Daniel Sodickson; Graham Wiggins Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2018-12-21 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Bili Wang; Bei Zhang; Zidan Yu; Carlotta Ianniello; Karthik Lakshmanan; Jan Paska; Guillaume Madelin; Martijn Cloos; Ryan Brown Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2021-09-03 Impact factor: 4.478
Authors: Matthew Wilcox; Stephen Ogier; Sergey Cheshkov; Ivan Dimitrov; Craig Malloy; Steven Wright; Mary McDougall Journal: IEEE Trans Biomed Eng Date: 2021-05-21 Impact factor: 4.756
Authors: Bili Wang; Syed S Siddiq; Jerzy Walczyk; Mary Bruno; Iman Khodarahmi; Inge M Brinkmann; Robert Rehner; Karthik Lakshmanan; Jan Fritz; Ryan Brown Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-09-02 Impact factor: 4.996