Emre Kopanoglu1, Cem M Deniz2, M Arcan Erturk3, Richard G Wise1,4. 1. Cardiff University Brain Research Imaging Centre (CUBRIC), School of Psychology, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK. 2. Department of Radiology, New York University Langone Health, New York, New York. 3. Restorative Therapies Group, Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minnesota. 4. Institute for Advanced Biomedical Technologies, Department of Neuroscience, Imaging and Clinical Sciences, G. D'Annunzio University of Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study investigates the implications of all degrees of freedom of within-scan patient head motion on patient safety. METHODS: Electromagnetic simulations were performed by displacing and/or rotating a virtual body model inside an 8-channel transmit array to simulate 6 degrees of freedom of motion. Rotations of up to 20° and displacements of up to 20 mm including off-axis axial/coronal translations were investigated, yielding 104 head positions. Quadrature excitation, RF shimming, and multi-spoke parallel-transmit excitation pulses were designed for axial slice-selection at 7T, for seven slices across the head. Variation of whole-head specific absorption rate (SAR) and 10-g averaged local SAR of the designed pulses, as well as the change in the maximum eigenvalue (worst-case pulse) were investigated by comparing off-center positions to the central position. RESULTS: In their respective worst-cases, patient motion increased the eigenvalue-based local SAR by 42%, whole-head SAR by 60%, and the 10-g averaged local SAR by 210%. Local SAR was observed to be more sensitive to displacements along right-left and anterior-posterior directions than displacement in the superior-inferior direction and rotation. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to investigate the effect of all 6 degrees of freedom of motion on safety of practical pulses. Although the results agree with the literature for overlapping cases, the results demonstrate higher increases (up to 3.1-fold) in local SAR for off-axis displacement in the axial plane, which had received less attention in the literature. This increase in local SAR could potentially affect the local SAR compliance of subjects, unless realistic within-scan patient motion is taken into account during pulse design.
PURPOSE: This study investigates the implications of all degrees of freedom of within-scan patient head motion on patient safety. METHODS: Electromagnetic simulations were performed by displacing and/or rotating a virtual body model inside an 8-channel transmit array to simulate 6 degrees of freedom of motion. Rotations of up to 20° and displacements of up to 20 mm including off-axis axial/coronal translations were investigated, yielding 104 head positions. Quadrature excitation, RF shimming, and multi-spoke parallel-transmit excitation pulses were designed for axial slice-selection at 7T, for seven slices across the head. Variation of whole-head specific absorption rate (SAR) and 10-g averaged local SAR of the designed pulses, as well as the change in the maximum eigenvalue (worst-case pulse) were investigated by comparing off-center positions to the central position. RESULTS: In their respective worst-cases, patient motion increased the eigenvalue-based local SAR by 42%, whole-head SAR by 60%, and the 10-g averaged local SAR by 210%. Local SAR was observed to be more sensitive to displacements along right-left and anterior-posterior directions than displacement in the superior-inferior direction and rotation. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to investigate the effect of all 6 degrees of freedom of motion on safety of practical pulses. Although the results agree with the literature for overlapping cases, the results demonstrate higher increases (up to 3.1-fold) in local SAR for off-axis displacement in the axial plane, which had received less attention in the literature. This increase in local SAR could potentially affect the local SAR compliance of subjects, unless realistic within-scan patient motion is taken into account during pulse design.
Authors: E Yacoub; A Shmuel; J Pfeuffer; P F Van De Moortele; G Adriany; P Andersen; J T Vaughan; H Merkle; K Ugurbil; X Hu Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2001-04 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Ingmar Graesslin; Hanno Homann; Sven Biederer; Peter Börnert; Kay Nehrke; Peter Vernickel; Giel Mens; Paul Harvey; Ulrich Katscher Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2012-01-09 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Jeana E Havidich; Michael Beach; Stephen F Dierdorf; Tracy Onega; Gautham Suresh; Joseph P Cravero Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2016-02-25 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: William A Grissom; Kawin Setsompop; Samuel A Hurley; Jeffrey Tsao; Julia V Velikina; Alexey A Samsonov Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2016-10-27 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: William A Grissom; Mohammad-Mehdi Khalighi; Laura I Sacolick; Brian K Rutt; Mika W Vogel Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2012-03-05 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Yaël Balbastre; Ali Aghaeifar; Nadège Corbin; Mikael Brudfors; John Ashburner; Martina F Callaghan Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2022-03-21 Impact factor: 3.737