PURPOSE: To explore the potential of performing body imaging at 10.5 Tesla (T) compared with 7.0T through evaluating the transmit/receive performance of similarly configured dipole antenna arrays. METHODS: Fractionated dipole antenna elements for 10.5T body imaging were designed and evaluated using numerical simulations. Transmit performance of antenna arrays inside the prostate, kidneys and heart were investigated and compared with those at 7.0T using both phase-only radiofrequency (RF) shimming and multi-spoke pulses. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) comparisons were also performed. A 10-channel antenna array was constructed to image the abdomen of a swine at 10.5T. Numerical methods were validated with phantom studies at both field strengths. RESULTS: Similar power efficiencies were observed inside target organs with phase-only shimming, but RF nonuniformity was significantly higher at 10.5T. Spokes RF pulses allowed similar transmit performance with accompanying local specific absorption rate increases of 25-90% compared with 7.0T. Relative SNR gains inside the target anatomies were calculated to be >two-fold higher at 10.5T, and 2.2-fold SNR gain was measured in a phantom. Gradient echo and fast spin echo imaging demonstrated the feasibility of body imaging at 10.5T with the designed array. CONCLUSION: While comparable power efficiencies can be achieved using dipole antenna arrays with static shimming at 10.5T; increasing RF nonuniformities underscore the need for efficient, robust, and safe parallel transmission methods. Magn Reson Med 77:434-443, 2017.
PURPOSE: To explore the potential of performing body imaging at 10.5 Tesla (T) compared with 7.0T through evaluating the transmit/receive performance of similarly configured dipole antenna arrays. METHODS: Fractionated dipole antenna elements for 10.5T body imaging were designed and evaluated using numerical simulations. Transmit performance of antenna arrays inside the prostate, kidneys and heart were investigated and compared with those at 7.0T using both phase-only radiofrequency (RF) shimming and multi-spoke pulses. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) comparisons were also performed. A 10-channel antenna array was constructed to image the abdomen of a swine at 10.5T. Numerical methods were validated with phantom studies at both field strengths. RESULTS: Similar power efficiencies were observed inside target organs with phase-only shimming, but RF nonuniformity was significantly higher at 10.5T. Spokes RF pulses allowed similar transmit performance with accompanying local specific absorption rate increases of 25-90% compared with 7.0T. Relative SNR gains inside the target anatomies were calculated to be >two-fold higher at 10.5T, and 2.2-fold SNR gain was measured in a phantom. Gradient echo and fast spin echo imaging demonstrated the feasibility of body imaging at 10.5T with the designed array. CONCLUSION: While comparable power efficiencies can be achieved using dipole antenna arrays with static shimming at 10.5T; increasing RF nonuniformities underscore the need for efficient, robust, and safe parallel transmission methods. Magn Reson Med 77:434-443, 2017.
Authors: O Ipek; A J E Raaijmakers; D W J Klomp; J J W Lagendijk; P R Luijten; C A T van den Berg Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2011-12-14 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: William Grissom; Chun-yu Yip; Zhenghui Zhang; V Andrew Stenger; Jeffrey A Fessler; Douglas C Noll Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Zhenghui Zhang; Chun-Yu Yip; William Grissom; Douglas C Noll; Fernando E Boada; V Andrew Stenger Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Bob van den Bergen; Cornelis A T van den Berg; Dennis W J Klomp; Jan J W Lagendijk Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2009-07 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Adam C Zelinski; Lawrence L Wald; Kawin Setsompop; Vijayanand Alagappan; Borjan A Gagoski; Vivek K Goyal; Elfar Adalsteinsson Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Cem Murat Deniz; Ryan Brown; Riccardo Lattanzi; Leeor Alon; Daniel K Sodickson; Yudong Zhu Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2012-06-19 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Bastien Guérin; Kawin Setsompop; Huihui Ye; Benedikt A Poser; Andrew V Stenger; Lawrence L Wald Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2014-06-17 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Thomas F Budinger; Mark D Bird; Lucio Frydman; Joanna R Long; Thomas H Mareci; William D Rooney; Bruce Rosen; John F Schenck; Victor D Schepkin; A Dean Sherry; Daniel K Sodickson; Charles S Springer; Keith R Thulborn; Kamil Uğurbil; Lawrence L Wald Journal: MAGMA Date: 2016-05-18 Impact factor: 2.310
Authors: William A Grissom; Dan Xu; Adam B Kerr; Jeffrey A Fessler; Douglas C Noll Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2009-05-12 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: Alireza Sadeghi-Tarakameh; Gregor Adriany; Gregory J Metzger; Russell L Lagore; Steve Jungst; Lance DelaBarre; Pierre-Francois Van de Moortele; Kamil Ugurbil; Ergin Atalar; Yigitcan Eryaman Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2020-06-23 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Xiaoxuan He; M Arcan Ertürk; Andrea Grant; Xiaoping Wu; Russell L Lagore; Lance DelaBarre; Yiğitcan Eryaman; Gregor Adriany; Eddie J Auerbach; Pierre-François Van de Moortele; Kâmil Uğurbil; Gregory J Metzger Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2019-12-17 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Kamil Uğurbil; Pierre-Francois Van de Moortele; Andrea Grant; Edward J Auerbach; Arcan Ertürk; Russell Lagore; Jutta M Ellermann; Xiaoxuan He; Gregor Adriany; Gregory J Metzger Journal: Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am Date: 2021-02 Impact factor: 2.266
Authors: Russell L Lagore; Steen Moeller; Jan Zimmermann; Lance DelaBarre; Jerahmie Radder; Andrea Grant; Kamil Ugurbil; Essa Yacoub; Noam Harel; Gregor Adriany Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2021-01-29 Impact factor: 4.044