PURPOSE: To identify and characterize the sources of B0 field changes due to head motion, to reduce motion sensitivity in human brain MRI. METHODS: B0 fields were measured in 5 healthy human volunteers at various head poses. After measurement of the total field, the field originating from the subject was calculated by subtracting the external field generated by the magnet and shims. A subject-specific susceptibility model was created to quantify the contribution of the head and torso. The spatial complexity of the field changes was analyzed using spherical harmonic expansion. RESULTS: Minor head pose changes can cause substantial and spatially complex field changes in the brain. For rotations and translations of approximately 5 º and 5 mm, respectively, at 7 T, the field change that is associated with the subject's magnetization generates a standard deviation (SD) of about 10 Hz over the brain. The stationary torso contributes to this subject-associated field change significantly with a SD of about 5 Hz. The subject-associated change leads to image-corrupting phase errors in multi-shot <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>T</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> -weighted acquisitions. CONCLUSION: The B0 field changes arising from head motion are problematic for multishot <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>T</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> -weighted imaging. Characterization of the underlying sources provides new insights into mitigation strategies, which may benefit from individualized predictive field models in addition to real-time field monitoring and correction strategies.
PURPOSE: To identify and characterize the sources of B0 field changes due to head motion, to reduce motion sensitivity in human brain MRI. METHODS: B0 fields were measured in 5 healthy human volunteers at various head poses. After measurement of the total field, the field originating from the subject was calculated by subtracting the external field generated by the magnet and shims. A subject-specific susceptibility model was created to quantify the contribution of the head and torso. The spatial complexity of the field changes was analyzed using spherical harmonic expansion. RESULTS: Minor head pose changes can cause substantial and spatially complex field changes in the brain. For rotations and translations of approximately 5 º and 5 mm, respectively, at 7 T, the field change that is associated with the subject's magnetization generates a standard deviation (SD) of about 10 Hz over the brain. The stationary torso contributes to this subject-associated field change significantly with a SD of about 5 Hz. The subject-associated change leads to image-corrupting phase errors in multi-shot <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>T</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> -weighted acquisitions. CONCLUSION: The B0 field changes arising from head motion are problematic for multishot <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>T</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> -weighted imaging. Characterization of the underlying sources provides new insights into mitigation strategies, which may benefit from individualized predictive field models in addition to real-time field monitoring and correction strategies.
Authors: Jeff H Duyn; Peter van Gelderen; Tie-Qiang Li; Jacco A de Zwart; Alan P Koretsky; Masaki Fukunaga Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2007-06-22 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Djaudat Idiyatullin; Curt Corum; Steen Moeller; Hari S Prasad; Michael Garwood; Donald R Nixdorf Journal: J Endod Date: 2011-04-06 Impact factor: 4.171
Authors: Melvyn B Ooi; Jordan Muraskin; Xiaowei Zou; William J Thomas; Sascha Krueger; Murat Aksoy; Roland Bammer; Truman R Brown Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2012-04-12 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Daniel Polak; Daniel Nicolas Splitthoff; Bryan Clifford; Wei-Ching Lo; Susie Y Huang; John Conklin; Lawrence L Wald; Kawin Setsompop; Stephen Cauley Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2021-08-13 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Tess E Wallace; Tobias Kober; Jason P Stockmann; Jonathan R Polimeni; Simon K Warfield; Onur Afacan Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2022-09-12 Impact factor: 3.737
Authors: Tess E Wallace; Jonathan R Polimeni; Jason P Stockmann; W Scott Hoge; Tobias Kober; Simon K Warfield; Onur Afacan Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2020-09-24 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Jiaen Liu; Erin S Beck; Stefano Filippini; Peter van Gelderen; Jacco A de Zwart; Gina Norato; Pascal Sati; Omar Al-Louzi; Hadar Kolb; Maxime Donadieu; Mark Morrison; Jeff H Duyn; Daniel S Reich Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2021-07-01 Impact factor: 10.065
Authors: Ovidiu C Andronesi; Pallab K Bhattacharyya; Wolfgang Bogner; In-Young Choi; Aaron T Hess; Phil Lee; Ernesta M Meintjes; M Dylan Tisdall; Maxim Zaitzev; André van der Kouwe Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2020-07-20 Impact factor: 4.044