Clarissa Z Cooley1,2, Patrick C McDaniel3,4, Jason P Stockmann3,5, Sai Abitha Srinivas3, Stephen F Cauley3,5, Monika Śliwiak3, Charlotte R Sappo3, Christopher F Vaughn3, Bastien Guerin3,5, Matthew S Rosen3,5,6, Michael H Lev5,7, Lawrence L Wald3,5,8. 1. Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Charlestown, MA, USA. czcooley@mgh.harvard.edu. 2. Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. czcooley@mgh.harvard.edu. 3. Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Charlestown, MA, USA. 4. Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA. 5. Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 6. Department of Physics, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA. 7. Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 8. Harvard-MIT Division of Health Sciences and Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Abstract
Access to scanners for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is typically limited by cost and by infrastructure requirements. Here, we report the design and testing of a portable prototype scanner for brain MRI that uses a compact and lightweight permanent rare-earth magnet with a built-in readout field gradient. The 122-kg low-field (80 mT) magnet has a Halbach cylinder design that results in a minimal stray field and requires neither cryogenics nor external power. The built-in magnetic field gradient reduces the reliance on high-power gradient drivers, lowering the overall requirements for power and cooling, and reducing acoustic noise. Imperfections in the encoding fields are mitigated with a generalized iterative image reconstruction technique that leverages previous characterization of the field patterns. In healthy adult volunteers, the scanner can generate T1-weighted, T2-weighted and proton density-weighted brain images with a spatial resolution of 2.2 × 1.3 × 6.8 mm3. Future versions of the scanner could improve the accessibility of brain MRI at the point of care, particularly for critically ill patients.
Access to scanners for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is typically limited by cost and by infrastructure requirements. Here, we report the design and testing of a portable prototype scanner for brain MRI that uses a compact and lightweight permanent rare-earth magnet with a built-in readout field gradient. The 122-kg low-field (80 mT) magnet has a Halbach cylinder design that results in a minimal stray field and requires neither cryogenics nor external power. The built-in magnetic field gradient reduces the reliance on high-power gradient drivers, lowering the overall requirements for power and cooling, and reducing acoustic noise. Imperfections in the encoding fields are mitigated with a generalized iterative image reconstruction technique that leverages previous characterization of the field patterns. In healthy adult volunteers, the scanner can generate T1-weighted, T2-weighted and proton density-weighted brain images with a spatial resolution of 2.2 × 1.3 × 6.8 mm3. Future versions of the scanner could improve the accessibility of brain MRI at the point of care, particularly for critically ill patients.
Neurological disorders are the 2nd leading cause of death and the
leading cause of disability globally [1]. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the reference standard for
assessment of these disorders due to its ability to image intracranial anatomy with
unparalleled soft tissue contrast. However, large populations of patients are
precluded from access to MRI due to its limitations. Most notably, MRI scanners are
costly, require special infrastructure, and are immobile. This makes MRI unavailable
to patients who cannot be safely transported to the scanner or who are in
low-resource settings.The development of a portable, low-cost MRI device for brain imaging could
expand access to MRI neuroimaging and enable point-of-care (POC) diagnostics. In
emergency medicine, neuroimaging constitutes the majority of MRI examinations
[2]. POC MRI could expedite
assessment of neurological emergencies that are not as accurately characterized by
compute tomography (CT). For example, POC MRI could detect subtle signs of increased
intracranial pressure associated with head trauma, stroke, hematomas, or
hydrocephalus. Similar needs exist for critically ill patients in neurological
intensive care units (ICUs). These unstable patients can be difficult or unsafe to
transport to a fixed MRI scanner that might even be located in a different building
[3]. Neonatal imaging
introduces related logistical burdens [4] that could be addressed with a POC bedside MRI scanner. Finally,
accessible, low-cost MRI could benefit remote low and middle income regions both in
the US and abroad, for example to monitor treatment of pediatric hydrocephalus in
Sub-Sahara Africa [5]. Overall, a
portable MRI head scanner capable of cost-efficient operation outside of a central
Radiology department could improve patient outcomes by detecting time-critical
pathology and informing immediate clinical management at the point-of-care.The design paradigm for conventional MRI scanners is fundamentally unsuitable
for POC operation. The cost and size of conventional scanners results from their
reliance on high-strength, homogeneous, static magnetic fields and switchable linear
field gradients [6]. In traditional
design, high magnetic fields (B0 >= 1.5 Tesla) are desirable to
increase detection sensitivity while high magnetic homogeneity is needed to ensure
that the MR image is encoded exclusively by the switchable field gradients. Based on
these principles, conventional MRI scanner design has converged on a large
superconducting magnet (4–10 tons) requiring high-cost and
maintenance-intensive cryogenic components. The switching linear gradient fields are
the primary source of acoustic noise (> 130 dB), power utilization (up to
1000 A and 2 kV), and require water cooling. This combination results in expensive,
large, heavy scanners that must be sited in a dedicated suite with special power and
cooling services. The complex and potentially dangerous hardware requires highly
trained staff to run and maintain the equipment and a safety exclusion zone to
prevent projectile accidents with ferrous objects. These aspects contribute to the
relative sparsity of MRI scanners compared to other imaging tools - including
digital X-ray, CT, and ultrasound (US) — less expensive systems that can be
used in a wider variety of settings. Further, there is a large global disparity in
MRI scanner density related to income levels and infrastructure [7].The need for lower cost and simplified siting of brain scanners has been
recognized by the MRI community and has driven recent industrial efforts. This
includes the assessment of a 0.55 T whole-body superconducting system [8], the development of a compact
superconducting 3 T brain scanner [9], a small footprint, cryogen-free 0.5 T head scanner [10], a 1 T permanent magnet system for
siting in the Neonatal ICU [11], a
low-field system for dedicated prostate imaging and biopsy guidance [12], and a 64 mT portable brain
scanner [13]. In addition to these
industrial initiatives, there are academic efforts directed towards more accessible
MRI. Low-cost pre-polarized systems have been developed for extremity [14] and brain [15] imaging; the brain imager employed cryogenic
SQUID detectors, a 0.1 T pre-polarizing field and ultra-low readout field (0.2 mT).
Brain imaging has also been shown in a low-cost, 6.5 mT scanner without
pre-polarization and cryogenics, instead focusing on high data-rate image encoding
and advanced reconstruction methods [16]. Although these ultra-low field brain scanners are low-cost,
they are not portable, and image quality is limited by poor signal-to-noise ratio
(SNR) at the ultra-low field strength. A high-field brain scanner has been proposed
with a head-only, high-temperature, superconducting magnet [17]. While compact and easily site-able, this
design is not intended for truly portable applications given the size of its
magnetic footprint and cryogenic requirements. Arrays of permanent magnets have been
proposed for low-field portable brain scanners [18-21]. This
method is compelling because permanent magnets do not require power or cooling, and
the low-field architecture can be configured to have a minimal external magnetic
footprint, reducing safety concerns from potential introduced ferrous objects in POC
use.Despite the rapid progress and growing interest in the field, there is no
consensus on the best approach for adapting MRI to portable and POC use. To
significantly reduce the size, cost, and complexity of the hardware, our design
departs from the canonical scanner design (i.e. homogeneous B0 field plus
3 switchable linear gradients). Our approach is summarized by 4 points. First,
instead of a versatile full body diagnostic device, we focus on a specialized
portable design for brain imaging. The small size of the head relative to the torso
lends itself naturally to scanner size reduction, facilitating a small diameter,
short bore design that fits around the head only. Second, we use a low-field magnet
consisting of an optimized array of rare-earth material to generate the static
B0 field. The use of permanent magnets capitalizes on the stored
magnetic field of these alloys, obviating the need for cryogenics and external
current sources. In contrast to the severe SNR penalty at ultra-low field, a
low-field magnet in the 50 – 200 mT range provides a workable trade-off
between SNR, safety, cost, and footprint required for POC applications. Third,
rather than designing the B0 magnet to be homogeneous, we build in a
spatial field variation for image encoding. This allows a reduction in magnet size,
and it eliminates the need for a traditional “readout” gradient
electromagnetic system, reducing the acoustic noise, power, and cooling requirements
of the scanner. Finally, we leverage Moore’s law [22] by relaxing hardware constraints and
addressing the resulting issues with advanced image reconstruction methods,
effectively shifting the burden from hardware to software.Although the sensitivity of the proposed POC scanner is close to that of
“low-field” clinical scanners, high-field MRI offers superior image
quality and more advanced imaging techniques (e.g. spectroscopy, SWI, DTI). The
proposed device, therefore, is not intended to replace high-field
MRI scanners, but rather, to offer useful MRI diagnostics to populations for whom
examination with a conventional, fixed MRI scanner is impractical or impossible, as
well as for whom other available imaging modalities, such as ultrasound, provide
only limited or suboptimal clinical assessment.Here, we present the design and validation of the head-only, portable,
lightweight, low-field (80 mT) MRI scanner based on a compact permanent magnet array
that weighs only 122 kg. Our scanner operates from a standard wall outlet, requires
no cooling, and can be mounted on a cart or within ambulance or van for
transportation to the POC. We present the overall scanner and subsystem design, the
imaging sequence and reconstruction approach, and in vivo brain
imaging validation (acquired in an RF shielded room) using T1,
T2 and proton density weighted imaging.
Prototype scanner
Figure 1 shows the compact POC
scanner located in an RF shielded room with a human subject in position for
scanning as well as an exploded view of the in-bore scanner components. From
left to right these are the 12-turn single-channel RF transmit/receive coil
helmet, the permanent magnet cylinder, the gradient coils, and the RF shield.
The total estimated weight of the full scanner system (including magnet, coils,
amplifiers, console, and cart) is 230 kg, the cart can be pushed by a single
person for transport. If the currently used general purpose prototyping
equipment (console, amplifiers, and cart) are replaced with custom efficient
lightweight designs, we project a total scanner weight of ~160 kg.
Fig. 1 |
Portable MRI brain scanner prototype.
a, The scanner main components are inside the 56 cm
diameter magnet (orange cylinder). The amplifiers console and computer are not
shown. The subject’s shoulders remain outside the magnet, allowing for a
lightweight, small bore design that fits the head only. The patient table
detaches from the scanner cart to facilitate transport. b, Exploded
computer-aided design (CAD) model of the main scanner components (from left to
right): spiral transmit/receive RF helmet coil, Halbach magnet cylinder, 2-axis
gradient coil, and RF shield. c, Corresponding photo of exploded
view.
Permanent magnet.
The head-only permanent magnet consists of a sparse array of
neodymium (NdFeB) rare-earth magnets in a Halbach cylinder
configuration[18,23]. The Halbach cylinder has
a B0 direction which is transverse to the axis of the cylinder.
We define the B0 direction as the z direction and label the y
direction along the cylinder axis. The ideal dipolar Halbach configuration
consists of permanent magnet segments with a magnetization direction that
rotates 4π around the cylinder azimuthally[24]. This results in a homogeneous
transverse field inside the magnet and zero field outside the magnet. The
intrinsically self-shielding design is ideal for portable applications where
stray fields pose operational and safety hazards. In addition, unlike other
permanent magnet designs, the Halbach magnet does not require a heavy, high
permeability (iron/steel) yoke to guide the flux lines, yielding an
efficient strength to weight ratio. There is an inherent trade-off between a
magnet’s size and homogeneity in the imaging region of interest
(ROI). For a given volume of permanent magnet material there is also a
tradeoff between the diameter of the magnet and the field strength. In order
to maintain a small magnet diameter (for portability and field strength), we
design the magnet for operation with the subject’s shoulders outside
the magnet.In practice, a highly homogeneous Halbach magnet with these
geometric constraints is difficult to achieve. Instead of striving to
maximize homogeneity in our design, the magnetic field variation is shaped
into a built-in field gradient for image encoding. This approach allows a
very compact, intrinsically inhomogeneous lightweight magnet and eliminates
the need for 1 of the 3 gradient coil systems. Specifically, the built-in
gradient replaces the “read-out” gradient system (coil +
current driver) which would normally need to overcome the magnet’s
spurious B0 variation. This would require high power and cooling
for conventional encoding approaches within the inhomogeneous magnet. The
high-power readout gradient would also produce high acoustic noise during
switching. Overall, the built-in gradient paradigm is attractive for a POC
scanner as it reduces the magnet cost and size and significantly reduces the
full system’s power/cooling needs and acoustic noise. However, we
note that this scheme reduces flexibility in the choice of pulse
sequences.We allowed an genetic optimization algorithm to perturb the basic
Halbach cylinder design by placing two grades (N42 and N52) of 1”
NdFeB permanent magnet cubes to produce a favorable B0 field and
built-in gradient in the x direction[18] (the coordinate system was changed compared to
previous publications[18,23,25-27],
to adhere to the more traditional use of ‘x’ for the readout
gradient direction). Figure 2 shows the
resulting magnet design with 641 NdFeB 1” cubes arranged in 3 layers
of 24 rungs. Figure 2a-b show photos of the superior end of the magnet
with the cover removed exposing the ends of the magnet rungs and shim trays
(the single row 3rd layer near the shoulders is not visible). The
NdFeB cubes are contained within the green, square cross-section, structural
fiberglass tubes. Figure 2c,d shows the optimized arrangement of N42
(white) and N52 (grey) magnets and the measured B0 field maps. To
improve the gradient field shape, a 2nd optimization stage
followed for shim magnet placement with smaller NdFeB elements[27] (visualized in Fig. 2e) using a similar algorithm. Figure 2f shows the improved gradient
linearity after shimming. Compared to the orientation of field-maps shown in
Figure 2, for imaging experiments,
the magnet was rotated 60 degrees to help minimize non-linearities in the
FOV.
Fig. 2 |
Permanent low-field magnet design.
a, The B0 = 80 mT cylindrical Halbach magnet has
an outer diameter = 56 cm, length = 48 cm, total weight = 122 kg (80 kg of rare
earth material). Photo shows the superior side (“service end”) of
the magnet with a 35.3 cm diameter opening. The inferior side of the magnet
(shoulder side) has a 27 cm bore opening due to the 32 cm dia. ring of 1”
“booster” magnets near the shoulders placed to alleviate the field
fall-off. b, Close-up photo of superior end of magnet. The
1” NdFeB magnets are contained within the square cross-section fiberglass
tubes. The two main magnet layers are at radii 20.5 cm and 25 cm. The white
plastic shim trays contain the addition of smaller NdFeB magnets to further
optimize the magnet field. c, CAD model showing the distribution of
N52 grade (grey) and N42 grade (white) NdFeB 1” cubes comprising the
Halbach magnet optimized for a built-in monotonic read-out encoding field in the
x direction. d, Measured field-map in the axial 18 × 20 cm
planes for the constructed magnet distribution prior to shimming. The 17
× 14 cm ovals outline approximate brain dimensions. e, CAD
model of shim magnet distribution for fine-tuning of the field. The smaller shim
magnets axial position was fixed, but size (< 1/4” cube) and the
dipole direction were varied. F, Measured field-map of the shimmed
magnet, showing an improvement in the field linearity in x.
The constructed magnet assembly has length = 49cm, outer diameter =
57cm, inner diameter = 35cm, and bore access diameter at the shoulders of
27cm. The magnet used 80 kg of NdFeB material and the constructed assembly
weight was 122 kg. The B0 field averaged 80 mT over the 20 cm DSV
target volume and contained a built-in readout gradient of 7.6 mT/m. On
average the pull-force on a ferrous object equaled its weight at ~13
cm from the bore opening and ~1 cm from the outer cylindrical
surface, demonstrating a considerably smaller safety footprint than
conventional high-field MRI magnets.
Gradient coils.
While the magnet’s built-in field variation is used for image
encoding in the x dimension, we used the switchable gradient coils shown in
Fig. 3 for phase encoding in the y
and z direction. Previously, we introduced alternative encoding methods that
further reduced the need for switchable gradient systems, specifically the
combination of generalized projection imaging by rotating the Halbach
magnet[23,26] and either a phase-encode gradient
coil or RF encoding method such as Transmit Array Spatial Encoding
(TRASE)[25] for
encoding along the axis of the cylinder. While these methods can further
reduce or eliminate the need for gradient power amplifiers (GPAs), they also
require additional hardware. Moreover, the use of switchable gradients for
phase-encoding within a spin-echo sequence proved more robust to image
artifacts. Although we employ switchable gradients to encode in two
directions (y and z), minimal power is needed compared to conventional
scanners. The power reduction arises from two sources. First, unlike the
readout gradient, phase encoding gradients need not to dominate the
B0 inhomogeneity (ΔB0) in a spin-echo
sequence since the ΔB0 phase dispersion is refocused in
the spin-echo. Second, the permanent magnet design supports the use of
efficient gradient coils. The gradient coil efficiency benefits from the
compact, head-only geometry as well as the lack of shielding windings. This
shielding layer is conventionally needed to prevent eddy currents on the
conductive components of the superconducting magnet and cryostat. However,
the NdFeB magnets are made from sintered material that does not support
significant induced eddy currents, eliminating the need for the shielding
layer (and thus improving gradient efficiency). In the imaging experiments
described here, peak currents of 9A and 4.5A were used to the drive the z
and y gradient respectively.
Fig. 3 |
Gradient coil design.
a, Gy and Gz gradient coils with
wires press-fit into a tiered cylinder 3D printed former. The Gy
gradient coil is on the outer surface and Gz is on the inner surface.
The tiered shape allows for maximum diameter (34.8 cm) and length (42.7 cm)
within the magnet. b-c, Gradient coils’ current density
contours designed with a BEM stream function method optimized for linearity in
the 20 cm ROI. d-e, The measured gradient coil field maps for 1 A
of drive current in the coils. The Gy and Gz coil
efficiencies were 0.6 mT/m/A and 0.8 mT/m/A respectively.
Acoustic noise from gradient switching is much lower in this scanner
compared to conventional MRI scanners due to the lower B0 field
and the elimination of readout gradient coil. The A-weighted peak and
average sound pressure levels measured at the magnet center during the RARE
sequence were 75.4 dB and 69.3 dB respectively using a Bruel & Kjaer
model 2238 Mediator SPL meter with the manufacturer’s microphone and
extension cable.
Sequences.
The low B0 field and built-in gradient poses unique MRI
spin manipulation problems and sequence considerations. Because the RF
frequencies of the transmit (B1+) and receive (B1-)
magnetic fields are proportional to the inhomogeneous B0 field,
the 20 cm ROI encapsulates a Larmor range of 3.35–3.43 MHz (80 KHz
bandwidth). Traditional “hard” B1+ pulses would
require high RF power levels to manipulate all the spins in the wide Larmor
frequency bandwidth. Instead, we employ frequency-swept chirped
B1+ pulses for excitation and refocusing, which cover a large
bandwidth and are less susceptible to B1+ amplitude variation
[25,28].The built-in gradient precludes the standard formation of a gradient
echo and thus limits the MRI acquisition method to spin-echo based
sequences. Compared to high field MRI, the lower B0 field leads
to low RF heating and longer spin coherence times (T2 relaxation times). We
take advantage of these properties to enable an efficient acquisition
sequence using long multi-echo Rapid Acquisition and Relaxation Enhancement
(RARE) [29] volumetric
spin-echo sequences (Fig. 4). While we
demonstrate a 3D encoding approach utilizing the built-in gradient as a
readout gradient, it is also possible to use the gradient as a
slice-selection gradient for 2D imaging with phase encoding for in-plane
encoding [30,31].
Fig. 4 |
MRI pulse sequence diagram.
The 3D RARE (Rapid Imaging with Refocused Echoes) pulse sequence is
shown for proton density (PD) weighted sequence. The RF applies the 90-degree
excitation chirped pulse (3.2 ms, 100 kHz sweep) followed by a train of 180
degree chirped refocusing pulses (1.6 ms, 100 kHz sweep). The phase of the
pulses follows a phase cycling scheme that prevents mixing of the resulting FID
and Spectral echoes. The Gx readout gradient is the built-in
permanent magnet encoding field, and therefore is continuously applied
throughout the acquisition. The Gy gradient produces phase encoding
blips that vary along the echo train for partitioning data in the y dimension
completing the 23 encodes in each shot. The Gz phase encoding blips
are incremented shot-to-shot requiring 97 TR periods to complete the encoding.
The Signal Acquisition alternates between the narrow “FID echoes”
and wider “spectral echoes”. The sequence is converted to
T1-weighting with the addition of an initial inversion pulse. In
the T2-weighted sequence, the ordering of the Gy phase
encoding blips are re-arranged so that the center of k-space is captured at
TEeff = 167 ms.
Image reconstruction
Traditional MRI image reconstruction relies on the use of linear
encoding fields to reconstruct k-space data using the Fast Fourier Transform
(FFT). Although we optimized the gradient encoding fields for linearity, the
compact nature of the system limits linearity in the ROI, particularly towards
the periphery of the permanent magnet gradient – Gx.
Non-linear encoding fields can lead to image aliasing and “encoding
holes” [23,32,33], which can sometimes be alleviated with the use of
multi-coil receive arrays. However, if the encoding fields are monotonic, the
non-linearities will translate to more benign geometric distortion and variable
resolution in the image. If relatively small, this distortion can be corrected
using a model-based generalized image reconstruction technique[34] utilizing a
priori knowledge of the fields. These generalized techniques employ
a forward model of the time domain signal evolution in response to the known
encoding non-linear fields[32,35,36,33,23]. Our encoding model uses the measured
field-maps of the built-in readout gradient (Fig.
2f) and the gradient coils (Fig.
3c,e), and models the time
domain encoding process of our 3D RARE sequences.We solve for the image using an iterative conjugate gradient algorithm
implemented in MATLAB (Mathworks, Natick, MA) with GPUs. Supplementary Figure 1 shows a
T2-weighted 3D image of a ~11 cm diameter grapefruit with no visible
distortion. Figure 5 shows brain images of
3 healthy subjects with an image resolution of approximately 2.2 × 1.3
× 6.8 mm. This approximate resolution is calculated from a linear fit of
the field-maps but resolution actually varies slightly over the FOV due to the
encoding field non-linearities. The proof-of-principle images were acquired in
an RF shielded room. The top 3 rows show PD, T1, and
T2-weighted contrasts in the same subject (S1), followed by
T2-weighted images in two additional subjects (S2 and S3). The S3
FFT image (bottom row) was formed using a conventional reconstruction technique
on the S3 T2 data, which assumed linear field gradients instead of
the measured non-linear fields. Comparing this to the generalized reconstruction
technique demonstrates the distortion improvements achievable using a
priori information of the encoding fields. However, some image
distortion remains towards the periphery where Gx is less linear.
With the exception of S3 T2 and S3 FFT, each image was acquired in ~ 10
minutes. S3 T2 (S3 FFT) was acquired in 19 minutes to allow for more averages
and higher SNR.
Fig. 5 |
3D T2, T1 and PD-weighted images of the brain in healthy adult
volunteers.
A subset of the acquired 23 partitions are shown. Image resolution
~ 2.2 × 1.3 × 6.8 mm3. The first 5 rows show
images reconstructed with the generalized forward-model based reconstruction
method. S1 PD: (subject 1, male 63 years old) PD images acquired with 3D RARE,
TR/TEeff = 2900ms / 14ms, acquisition time = 9:24 min (2
averages). S1 T1: (subject 1) T1-weighted images acquired with
inversion prepped 3D RARE, TI/TR/TEeff = 400ms / 1830ms / 14ms,
acquisition time = 11:46 min (4 averages). S1 T2: (subject 1)
T2-weighted images acquired with 3D RARE sequence,
TR/TEeff =3000ms/167ms, acquisition time = 9:42 min (2 averages).
S2 T2: (subject 2, male 63 years old) T2-weighted images acquired
with 3D RARE sequence, TR/TEeff =3000ms/167ms, acquisition time =
9:42 min (2 averages). S3 T2: (subject 3, female, 53 years old)
T2-weighted images acquired with 3D RARE sequence,
TR/TEeff =3000ms/167ms, acquisition time = 19:24 min (4
averages). S3 FFT: the S3 T2 data reconstructed with a conventional FFT
reconstruction instead of the generalized method. This last image demonstrates
the geometric distortion that results from the non-linear encoding fields when
the field-maps are not included in the reconstruction model. The measured SNR in
the images were SNR = 127, 80, 68, 65, 124 for the image acquisitions in rows
1–5 respectively.
Discussion
Our portable scanner is capable of generating standard brain MRI contrasts
found on low-field clinical scanners – including T1, T2, inversion recovery
(IR)-prepped T2, proton density (PD), and diffusion weighted images (DWI) –
that are routinely used for detection, diagnosis, and monitoring of clinically
important brain pathology. The scanner offers superior soft-tissue contrast
resolution compared to other imaging modalities available for POC use- such as
ultrasound (US), digital X-ray (DXR), and computed tomography (CT) – which
are additionally limited by acoustic shadowing (US), beam hardening artifacts (DXR,
CT) from bone and calcified structures, ionizing radiation (DXR, CT), and poor
ability to distinguish certain central nervous system anatomic structures (e.g.,
gray versus white matter, subdural versus extradural spaces). Although both the
spatial resolution and sensitivity of this scanner are less than that of a
high-field MRI, the performance is sufficient to detect and characterize serious
intracranial processes at the POC, such as hemorrhage, hydrocephalous, infarction,
& mass lesions. Indeed, our portable, compact, affordable device could extend
the reach of MRI to answer critical, time-sensitive questions in settings where MRI
is not currently available, including urgent care centers, emergency rooms,
intensive care units, sports arenas, oncology clinics, remote field hospitals (e.g.,
for military & humanitarian assistance missions), and perhaps even
ambulances.Although our proposed MRI scanner design fulfills many of the requirements
for a POC brain imaging device, several considerations require additional attention.
The encoding field nonlinearities and their effect on the image are analyzed in
Figure 6. The error maps show the percent
difference between the measured and ideal maps. The nonlinearity and resulting error
are most severe in the permanent readout gradient, Gx, which has a 6.8%
average error and 46.6% maximum error in the 17 cm circular ROI. This leads to a
nonlinear mapping of voxels in the image that manifest as geometric distortion when
the simple FFT reconstruction is used (represented by the spatial deformation maps
in Figure 6). The generalized reconstruction
corrects for most of the spatial deformation, but instead the variability in the
local field gradient manifests as spatial varying image resolution.[2] For example, the average
Gx gradient is 7.6 mT/m with a 2.2 mT/m standard deviation in an 17
× 14 cm ellipse ROI (approximate brain size). With our imaging parameters,
this corresponds to an average resolution of 1.2 mm and a standard deviation in the
local resolution of 0.45 mm. The nonlinearity is less severe for Gz and
Gy, motivating the potential use of the FFT in those dimensions to
decrease the computational burden of the generalized reconstruction.
Fig. 6 |
Analysis of the measured encoding field-maps (Gx, Gz,
and Gy) in the central field-map slices.
The ideal maps are calculated as a linear fit to the measured maps. The
error maps show the percent difference between the measured maps and ideal maps.
The color range is higher (up to 50%) for the Gx gradient. Spatial
deformation maps show the resulting image distortion that occurs when the ideal
linear map is assumed (instead of the measured map). The non-linearities and
spatial deformation are most severe in the Gx encoding map, which is
generated by the built-in permanent magnet gradient. The Gx analysis
shows high errors near the periphery and severe spatial deformation approaching
signal singularities in some locations. In contrast, the gradient coil maps
(Gz and Gy) errors and spatial deformation maps are
more benign.
Currently, image distortion is not fully addressed by our generalized
reconstruction algorithm. Specifically, signal aliasing may be occurring due to the
curvature of the field-map isocontours, rendering the encoding fields non-orthogonal
- a situation not included in the model. Remaining geometric distortions may also
have contributions from measurement errors in the encoding field maps. These
distortions become more marked further from isocenter, where the non-linearities are
more severe (Fig. 6).The high temperature coefficient of magnetic remanence
(~−0.1%/C) and coercivity (~−0.5%/C) in NdFeB
material[37] results in
variation in the B0 field with room temperature, and could contribute to
errors in the reconstruction model. Before each data set is acquired, the center
Larmor frequency is set, reducing large off-resonance effects from temperature
drift. Further, a global B0 offset variable is adjusted in the
reconstruction model to account for differences in the experimental B0
field compared to the previously measured B0 field maps. However, we
currently assume that there are no significant temperature changes on the time scale
of each image acquisition (~10 minutes). To improve the accuracy of the
reconstruction model, field probes can be used to track global [23] or local changes in the B0 field
during the data acquisition.The power budget of the scanner is an important consideration for
portability and POC use. An example 1.5T commercial superconducting scanner
(Magnetom Aera; Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany) lists a typical power
consumption of 20.1 KW during exams[38]. The cryocooler system alone requires 6–8 kW of power.
The metallic cryostat also necessitates shielded gradient coils, which are
~30% less efficient. The gradient power amplifiers (GPAs) needed to drive
these large shielded gradient coils are a significant source of power consumption.
Ramping down a standard scanner to operate at low-field (for example 0.55T
[8] ) does not reduce the
total power consumption significantly. However, compact POC scanner designs can
yield substantial reductions in power consumption. For example, the Hyperfine 64 mT
scanner [13] operates with a maximum
power consumption of 1650W for the entire system including console, RF power amp,
and 3 axes of gradient amplifiers.Our presently described system reduces power needs with a compact design and
the use of permanent magnets for both the B0 field and readout gradient
field. The elimination of the superconducting system reduces the power consumption
significantly. Additionally, only two switchable GPAs are needed to drive the small,
unshielded phase encoding gradient coils, which typically operate at a lower
amplitude and duty-cycle than readout gradients. This further reduces the power
budget compared to the three GPA implementations found in standard MRI scanners. The
subsystems of the scanner currently consume a total of about 800W and can all be
operated from a standard power outlet. This includes about 400W for the RF transmit,
50W for the gradient amplifiers (10A into 2 Ohms for each coil at a 5% duty-cycle
and 40% efficiency), 200W for the console electronics, and 75W for the computer. The
previously introduced rotating permanent magnet + RF encoding approach[26] is expected to require slightly
more power, requiring a stepper motor and additional RF power but omitting both
gradient channels.Future iterations of the scanner design could focus more on industrial
patient interfacing and workflow considerations. The compact size of the scanner
results in a tight fit around the head, requiring special attention to the
mechanical design of this area, including entrance and exit patient positioning
(especially for intubated and highly monitored patients), and airflow and monitoring
within the bore. The volunteers imaged with the scanner, however, found it to be
comfortable during their >45-minute acquisition session. Our head-only magnet
design, moreover, improves patient comfort by eliminating confinement around the
body. Further, our design allowed acoustically quiet operation, eliminating the need
for ear plugs.The preliminary images presented here were acquired in an
electromagnetically shielded room, like that of traditional scanners. This RF
shielded scanner suite eliminates electromagnetic interference (EMI), which can
otherwise degrade image quality (signal to noise ratio, SNR) and can introduce
artifacts. In our portable system, although a copper shield was placed between the
gradient coils and RF head coil, this was insufficient to fully eliminate EMI in
human imaging. The openings in these shields are small compared to the relevant
wavelength of the system’s MRI signal (89 m), and the built-in shield was
sufficient to prevent EMI when imaging small phantoms or fruit (Fig. 5). When imaging human subjects, however, the body
parts outside of the shield act as an antenna, which conducts EMI into the MRI
receiver coil. For our pilot human imaging validation, therefore, we operated the
scanner inside a traditional Faraday cage to eliminate this source of image
degradation. Work is ongoing, however, to actively record and remove interference
using external pick-up coils that can monitor environmental EMI during imaging
[39,40].In order to maximize image SNR, a limited bandwidth RF receive coil was
chosen. This incurs some image shading in the readout direction which is partially
offset by the increased coil sensitivity at the FOV edge (near the wires). Ongoing
efforts include optimizing RF coil designs to increase SNR and extend FOV to more
inferior brain regions, as well as testing and validation with specific brain
pathologies, such as small vessel white matter disease, in addition to testing
healthy subjects. Preliminary work also suggests that diffusion weighted imaging
– critical to certain applications, such as acute stroke detection - is also
possible with our unconventional scanner architecture[41].
Outlook
This scanner design could serve as a foundation to develop and
clinically validate portable MRI devices for affordable, point-of-care
detection, assessment, and monitoring of diverse medical applications. In
addition to the diagnostic whole-brain imaging applications discussed, for
example, our architecture could be minimally modified for extremity and neonatal
imaging. Moreover, extending the general concept of liberating MRI design from
traditional constraints might lead to even more exotic designs with extreme
portability, such as hand-held devices. Devices that generate limited FOV images
or profiles directly under a single-sided scanner[12,31] could be used for diverse “real-time”
emergency and urgent care indications – such as detection, delineation,
& serial monitoring of soft tissue pathologies (e.g., pleural effusions,
extremity abscesses requiring drainage, or subdural/epidural hematomas), or to
provide guidance for interventional procedures (e.g., catheter placement, lumbar
punctures[39], or
biopsies[12]). Such
devices have the potential to complement or replace the roles of other (often
suboptimal or more limited) portable imaging modalities.In summary, we have introduced an MRI-scanner architecture based on a
compact, lightweight, low-field permanent magnet array, with built-in field
variation for MRI readout encoding and efficient electromagnetic gradient coils
for phase encoding. Our design leverages advanced image-reconstruction methods
to correct for magnetic field imperfections, freeing the hardware from
traditional constraints. Unlike conventional MRI scanner designs, this approach
could allow for POC operation due to the magnet’s modest size, lack of
cryogenics, and the intrinsic safety of the low-field, magnetically
self-shielded Halbach configuration. Both mobility and POC potential are also
facilitated by the low power consumption and low acoustic noise afforded by our
built-in readout gradient. The presented in vivo brain images
demonstrate the potential of the scanner for clinical application at the POC,
which could expand access of MRI to patient populations now underserved by
traditional MRI limitations.
Methods
Permanent magnet construction.
The head-sized permanent magnet was designed using a genetic
optimization framework previously described by Cooley et al [18]. The dimensions and basic geometry of
the sparse Halbach magnet were determined based on human anatomy and tradeoffs
between field strength and size. The region of interest is defined as a 20 cm
sphere with the isocenter at 17.8 cm from the inferior end of the magnet
(constrained by the shoulders). The magnet is asymmetric, extending 27.9 cm
above isocenter (superior direction) to improve homogeneity. A
“booster” ring of magnets is added near the shoulders to
compensate for the field “fall-off” effects here.The Halbach cylinder is made up of square cross-section permanent magnet
rungs divided into 2 full layers at diameters = 41 cm and 50 cm. Each layer
contains 24 rungs that are 45.7 cm in length. The additional Halbach
“booster ring” near the patient’s shoulders has a diameter
= 32 cm and length = 2.54 cm (1 magnet row). NdFeB rare earth magnetic material
was chosen because of its high remnant flux density, coercivity and lower cost
compared to SmCo. The magnet was constructed with stock 1” NdFeB cubes
(NB040 and NB041, Applied Magnets, Plano, TX). The use of standardized 1”
NdFeB cubes eases the cost and construction of the magnet and the sparsity of
the design reduces the cost and weight (albeit at the cost of field
strength).In the full magnet geometry, there are 888 predetermined potential
locations for the NdFeB cubes. A Genetic Algorithm determined the placement of
either N42 and N52 grade NdFeB cubes or plastic spacers at each location. The
optimization was constrained to produce a mean B0 >70mT with a
monotonic encoding field and reasonable total field range[18]. The resulting design, shown in Figure 2, contains 342 and 299 N42 and N52
NdFeB cubes respectively (~80 kg of NdFeB material).The non-magnetic housing for the NdFeB material uses 1”
cross-section structural fiberglass square tubes that contain the magnet
material. The rungs are mechanically supported by seven 1.27cm-thick ABS plastic
rings with waterjet cut square holes rotated in the Halbach configuration. The
design also contained 48 octagonal holes meant to hold trays of smaller shim
magnets. Threaded brass fastening rods and fiberglass dowel spacers increased
structural integrity. After full assembly of the mechanical housing, a pushing
jig was used to populate the NdFeB cubes into the corresponding rungs. The cube
magnets repel each other within the rungs, so the jig was needed to temporarily
extend the fiberglass rung length so the magnets could float apart. Then the jig
was used to push all the magnets into contact within the housing and bolt an end
cap on the tube. This was repeated for all 48 rungs. The NdFeB material was
handled with caution as serious injury could result from the forces between the
NdFeB cubes. The resulting magnet structure has a length = 49cm, outer diameter
= 57cm, inner diameter = 35cm, bore access diameter = 27cm and weight = 122
kg.A field-mapping robot was constructed to measure the field pattern in
the permanent magnet and gradient coils. The robot was based on a modified
“build-your-own” CNC router kit (Avid CNC, North Bend, Washington,
USA) which rastered a 3-axis gaussmeter probe (THM1176, Metrolab Technology,
Geneva, Switzerland). MATLAB software was used to simultaneously control the
stepper motors to traverse the probe through the magnet’s ROI and record
the gaussmeter field measurements.The field at construction was dominated by a 1st order field
variation, but the existing non-linearities caused severe image distortion and
some singularities (aliasing). Therefore, a target-field shimming iteration was
used to refine the built-in encoding field of the magnet[27]. This was achieved with an optimized
population of the 48 shim trays (each containing 42 shim magnet locations (for
up to 6.35mm NdFeB cubes). The orientation (dipole direction) and size of NdFeB
shim magnets at each of the 2016 potential shim locations was optimized to
minimize the RMSE deviation from an ideal linear “target” gradient
in the ROI. This calculation used an interior-point MATLAB optimization with
each shim magnet modeled as an ideal magnetic dipole. The varying size of the
resulting dipoles was practically realized by gluing smaller magnet pieces
together. The resulting shape and orientation of each shim magnet was designed
into the 3D printed shim trays.
Gradient coil construction.
The gradient coils were designed to create linear target field
gradients in the y and z direction in the imaging ROI[27,42]. The mechanical surfaces of the 2 coils were
predetermined to be on the inner and outer surface of a tiered cylinder
former designed to fit snuggly inside the magnet (length = 42.7 cm, diameter
1 = 34.8 cm, diameter 2 = 26.4 cm). The current stream functions of the
coils were optimized on a 20 cm diameter ROI using a stream function BEM
solver based on a published toolbox[43]. The achievable current density at the truncated
end of the coil (shoulder side) is limited by practical density of the
windings in this area which proved to be the main constraint limiting the
coil’s efficiency and linearity. Based on the optimized current
stream function, the coil winding patterns were designed for a target
gradient efficiency of 0.7 mT/m/A and a resistance of < 2 ohms. AWG
18 wire was press-fit into wire winding pattern grooves in a 3D printed
former. The field-mapping robot was used to measure the field pattern when
each coil was driven with 1 A inside the magnet. The resulting gradient
efficiencies and inductances/resistances were determined to be 0.575 mT/m/A
and 0.815 mT/m/A and 514 uH/1.9 Ohms and 336 uH/1.2 Ohms for Gy
and Gz, respectively. In the imaging sequences described here,
less than 10 A peak current is used at a low-duty cycle (3–5%)
allowing for passive air-cooling. The low power requirements of the gradient
systems will allow for the future integration of very low-cost, low-power,
small-footprint op-amp based drivers[44].
RF coil construction.
The RF coil (Fig.1b,c) is based on a compact spiral helmet
design[45] used for
transmit and receive with a passive transmit-receive switch. The coil is
wound on a tightly fitting helmet former of inner dimensions: 21 cm
(anterior-posterior), 17 cm (medial – lateral)[45]. The windings extend 10.7 cm from
the top of the head. The close-fitting spiral pattern provides favorable RF
receive efficiency and sensitivity. However, when the windings are uniformly
distributed on the helmet, the resulting B1 field is
inhomogeneous with a 87% higher field produced at the top of the head
compared to the bottom in simulation. When used as a transmit-receive coil,
the inhomogeneous nature of the resulting B1+ pattern causes
variable flip angles in the brain and image artifacts. To improve the
B1+ homogeneity, the winding distribution was empirically
adjusted using Biot-Savart simulations, resulting in a total of 12
asymmetric windings with a higher turn-density near the bottom of the coil.
This reduced the B1 range in the helmet by 79% compared to the
uniform winding design. The coil was constructed on a 3D printed
polycarbonate former with winding grooves. The non-uniform turn distribution
was wound with Litz wire (AWG 20 5/39/42, New England Wire, Lisbon, NH) and
tuned and matched to 50 ohms at the system’s 3.39 MHz Larmor
frequency with non-magnetic capacitors. The loaded and unloaded Q of the
coil was 150 and 225, its inductance was 69 μH and its simulated
efficiency was 28 μT/A (Supplementary Figure 1). A
rectangular excitation was observed to achieve a 90-degree flip angle (over
a limited bandwidth) with a power and pulse-width of 44 W and 80
μs.
Other hardware.
A passive crossed diode-based, lumped element quarter-wave 50 ohm
transmit-receive switch is used with the RF coil. Reception used a low-noise
50-ohm input impedance, 37 dB gain pre-amplifier (MITEQ model AU-1583,
Hauppauge, NY, USA) and a 24 dB second stage amplifier (Minicircuits model
ZFL-500LN+, Brooklyn, NY, USA). Additional hardware includes: a Tecmag
Bluestone MR console (Houston, TX, USA), AE Techron 7224 gradient amplifiers
(Elkhart, IN, USA), a 2kW peak-power RF power amplifier (Tomco Technologies
model BT02000-AlphaS-3MHz, Stepney, Australia), and patient table
constructed from T-slot aluminum extrusions. While this equipment is
well-suited for prototyping and validating the scanner design, the console,
gradient amplifiers, RF amplifier, and patient table could be replaced with
custom designs that prioritize cost and weight[44,46,47].
Acquisition method.
The permanent magnet readout encoding field is always on, causing an
inhomogeneous B0 field (ΔB0/B0
~ 2%) and a wide Larmor frequency bandwidth in the ROI (~80
kHz). For wide bandwidth RF excitation and refocusing in the spin-echo
train, shaped frequency-swept RF pulses (WURST pulses) were transmitted
instead of rectangular single-frequency pulses (hard pulses). This use of
WURST pulses for MRI in an inhomogeneous field has been previously described
[25,28]. Although similar to a rectangular
chirped pulse, WURST pulses have a soft taper on the rising and falling edge
of the pulse to reduce ringing artifacts and achieve a smooth transition at
the edges of the frequency band of excited spins. The excitation and
refocusing pulses used in our sequences are 3.2 and 1.6 ms long
(respectively) with a 100 kHz linear frequency sweep and a WURST-40
amplitude envelope. The simulations in Supplementary Figure 2
demonstrate the bandwidth coverage of the pulses and the robustness to
B1 variation in the refocusing pulses.The linear frequency sweep of the RF pulses imparts an undesired
quadratic phase on the spins across frequency. When the background field
gradient is held constant during excitation and refocusing, the quadratic
phase can be removed from odd-numbered echoes by setting the frequency sweep
rate of the refocusing pulse to be twice as fast as that of the excitation
pulse[48]. The
resulting quadratic phase cancellation in the odd echoes of the RARE echo
train results in “FID echoes” (classic spin-echoes). However,
the even-numbered echoes contain the quadratic phase, resulting in
“spectral echoes” in which different spin isochromats refocus
at different time points. Confounding mixing of the FID and spectral echoes
can result from flip angle errors. To alleviate this, phase cycling of the
RF pulses (alternating 0 and 90 degrees) is used to form two spin coherence
pathways[27].
Although there are schemes to combine data from the two types of
echos[25,28], we reconstruct only the spectral
echoes to limit data inconsistency.We use 3D RARE sequences, which support standard T2,
IR-prepped T2, T1, proton density (PD), and diffusion
contrasts. Sequences were implemented in TNMR Version 3.4.31 for use with
the Tecmag console. Since no slice-selective gradient is employed, the
system acquires 3D encoded axial imaging where the y phase encode gradient
is used for partitioning the 3D data into ~7mm thick image
partitions. Figure 4 depicts the basic
pulse sequence diagram, including the chirped RF pulses, the Gy
phase-encoding blips (varying down the spin-echo train), the Gz
phase-encoding blips (incrementing shot-to-shot for each spin-echo train),
and the Gx permanent magnet read-out gradient (always on). The
resulting spin-echoes (signal acquisition line) show the previously
described alternating “FID-echo” and
“spectral-echo” behanvior[28].For T2-weighting, the y-dimension (partition) phase
encoding is performed along the echo train with a k-space trajectory placing
the center of k-space in the middle echo. The Z-dimension gradient phase
encoding is incremented shot to shot. The proton density sequence uses a
“center-out” k-space ordering down the echo-train. The
T1 sequence is similar but includes an Inversion Recovery
(IR) prep pulse.Diffusion weighting in the RARE sequences is expected to be small.
The diffusion weighting (b-value) from a static gradient in a RARE sequence
is given by b = 1/12 γ2G2 τ3
where γ is the proton gyromagnetic ratio, G is the fixed gradient
amplitude and τ is the RARE echo spacing[49]. For the 7 ms echo-spacing used and
the G = 7 mT/m fixed gradient, diffusion weighting is minimal with an
expected b-value of < 1 s/mm2. Future plans for
diffusion-weighted neuroimaging will require the addition of a diffusion
encoding module between the RF excitation pulse and the first echo[41].
In vivo experiments.
Subjects were setup in a supine position on the detachable patient
table for imaging. Before attaching the patient table to the scanner, the RF
coil was positioned on the subject. A 1-minute, low-resolution image
acquisition was used to confirm the proper positioning of the
subject’s head in the coil and magnet. All in vivo
images were acquired with a matrix size of 256 × 97 × 23 and
an approximate resolution = 2.2 × 1.3 × 6.8 mm3.
Subject 1 was imaged with the 3D RARE PD-weighted sequence
(TR/TEeff = 2900ms / 14ms, 2 averages, acquisition time =
9:24 min), the inversion-prepped 3D RARE T1-weighted sequence
(TI/TR/TEeff = 400ms / 1830ms / 14ms, 4 averages, acquisition
time = 11:46 min), and the 3D RARE T2-weighted sequence (TR/TEeff
=3000ms/167ms, 2 averages, acquisition time = 9:42 min). Subject 2 was
imaged with the 3D RARE T2-weighted sequence (TR/TEeff
=3000ms/167ms, 2 averages, acquisition time = 9:42 min). Subject 3 was
imaged with the 3D RARE T2-weighted sequence (TR/TEeff
=3000ms/167ms, 4 averages, acquisition time = 19:24 min). The study was
approved by the institutional review board of the Partners Healthcare, and
written informed consent was obtained before scanning.
Image reconstruction method.
The images are reconstructed from the data using a generalized
encoding matrix model to describe the expected signal based on the measured
field maps and an iterative linear solver to determine the image[32,35,36,33,23]. This provides a more accurate relation between the
encoded signal and the object than the Fourier model (which assumes linear
encoding fields) and, in principle, alleviates image distortion from the
imperfect encoding fields.A full 3D reconstruction can be done using all three encoding
field-maps, but to reduce the matrix size the data is partitioned in the y
direction using the FFT. The generalized reconstruction method is then used
to reconstruct each 2D axial image. Specifically, the encoding matrix
represents the phase at each time domain sample point in an echo, imparted
by the Gx readout encoding field and the Gz phase
encoding blips. Without relaxation effects, the assumed signal equation for
the readout time point, t, and the nth Gz phase encode
is modeled as: where is the 2D position,
ɣ is the gyromagnetic ratio in Hz/Tesla,
G is the non-linear
built-in readout gradient field map (in units of Tesla),
I(n) is the Gz scaling factor for
nth phase encode blip,
G is the 2D phase
encoding gradient field map, τ is the length of the
phase encode blip, and m is the image. A coil sensitivity
weighting is not included because we assume a uniform receive sensitivity
from the volume coil.This equation can be simplified as a matrix-vector product, where
the matrix contains the known field quantities (Gx and
Gz) and the vector is the list of image pixels to be
estimated. Therefore, image reconstruction is a linear inverse problem that
we solve using conjugate gradient (CG). The system matrix is very large in
our case; therefore, we do not store in memory and instead compute its rows
online, which is very fast. The Gx and Gz field maps
contain a few million elements each, and therefore fit easily in the global
shared memory of modern graphical processing unit (GPU) such as the Tesla
K20c (5 GB) or the more recent Tesla P100 (16 GB). Implementation of the
matrix-vector product (Ax and AHx, where H is the
complex-transpose operation) takes a couple of seconds in the GPU compared
to ~1 hour on a single CPU. To minimize the total computation time,
we also employ a preconditioner which is the diagonal matrix comprised of
the square of the diagonal entries of the system matrix correlation matrix
(C=AHA). This is a good preconditioner for this problem since
it is 1) ultra-rapid to compute, 2) is trivial to invert and 3) reduces the
condition number of the problem from ~133 to ~2. As a result,
iterative reconstruction of a 220×180 matrix-size image (FOV 22
× 18 cm) requires 5–10 iterations at the 0.1% convergence
level which represents a total time of <20 seconds.We apply an intensity correction to the images to alleviate shading
caused by B1 inhomogeneity. This is done by masking each 2D image
and dividing it by a low-pass-filtered version of itself. Image SNR
calculations were performed on the FFT reconstructed version of the image,
to reduce the confounding effects of noise amplification in iterative
reconstruction. The calculation was performed in a central partition
magnitude image. SNR was calculated as the mean of a high intensity ROI
(~30 voxels) divided by the standard deviation of background ROI
(~800 voxels). A factor of sqrt(π/2) was applied to account
for the Rician distribution of the magnitude image noise.
Authors: Nathaniel I Matter; Greig C Scott; Ross D Venook; Sharon E Ungersma; Thomas Grafendorfer; Albert Macovski; Steven M Conolly Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Adrienne E Campbell-Washburn; Rajiv Ramasawmy; Matthew C Restivo; Ipshita Bhattacharya; Burcu Basar; Daniel A Herzka; Michael S Hansen; Toby Rogers; W Patricia Bandettini; Delaney R McGuirt; Christine Mancini; David Grodzki; Rainer Schneider; Waqas Majeed; Himanshu Bhat; Hui Xue; Joel Moss; Ashkan A Malayeri; Elizabeth C Jones; Alan P Koretsky; Peter Kellman; Marcus Y Chen; Robert J Lederman; Robert S Balaban Journal: Radiology Date: 2019-10-01 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Lawrence L Wald; Patrick C McDaniel; Thomas Witzel; Jason P Stockmann; Clarissa Zimmerman Cooley Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2019-10-12 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Thomas K F Foo; Evangelos Laskaris; Mark Vermilyea; Minfeng Xu; Paul Thompson; Gene Conte; Christopher Van Epps; Christopher Immer; Seung-Kyun Lee; Ek T Tan; Dominic Graziani; Jean-Baptise Mathieu; Christopher J Hardy; John F Schenck; Eric Fiveland; Wolfgang Stautner; Justin Ricci; Joseph Piel; Keith Park; Yihe Hua; Ye Bai; Alex Kagan; David Stanley; Paul T Weavers; Erin Gray; Yunhong Shu; Matthew A Frick; Norbert G Campeau; Joshua Trzasko; John Huston; Matt A Bernstein Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2018-03-13 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Ursula Beckmann; Donna M Gillies; Sean M Berenholtz; Albert W Wu; Peter Pronovost Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2004-02-26 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Mathieu Sarracanie; Cristen D LaPierre; Najat Salameh; David E J Waddington; Thomas Witzel; Matthew S Rosen Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2015-10-15 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Yadiel Sánchez; Brian J Yun; Anand M Prabhakar; McKinley Glover; Benjamin A White; Theodore I Benzer; Ali S Raja Journal: West J Emerg Med Date: 2017-07-19
Authors: Sai Abitha Srinivas; Stephen F Cauley; Jason P Stockmann; Charlotte R Sappo; Christopher E Vaughn; Lawrence L Wald; William A Grissom; Clarissa Z Cooley Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2021-09-04 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Mercy H Mazurek; Bradley A Cahn; Matthew M Yuen; Anjali M Prabhat; Isha R Chavva; Jill T Shah; Anna L Crawford; E Brian Welch; Jonathan Rothberg; Laura Sacolick; Michael Poole; Charles Wira; Charles C Matouk; Adrienne Ward; Nona Timario; Audrey Leasure; Rachel Beekman; Teng J Peng; Jens Witsch; Joseph P Antonios; Guido J Falcone; Kevin T Gobeske; Nils Petersen; Joseph Schindler; Lauren Sansing; Emily J Gilmore; David Y Hwang; Jennifer A Kim; Ajay Malhotra; Gordon Sze; Matthew S Rosen; W Taylor Kimberly; Kevin N Sheth Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2021-08-25 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Joshua R Harper; Venkateswararao Cherukuri; Tom O'Reilly; Mingzhao Yu; Edith Mbabazi-Kabachelor; Ronald Mulando; Kevin N Sheth; Andrew G Webb; Benjamin C Warf; Abhaya V Kulkarni; Vishal Monga; Steven J Schiff Journal: Neuroimage Clin Date: 2021-11-23 Impact factor: 4.881
Authors: Yilong Liu; Alex T L Leong; Yujiao Zhao; Linfang Xiao; Henry K F Mak; Anderson Chun On Tsang; Gary K K Lau; Gilberto K K Leung; Ed X Wu Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2021-12-14 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Jacob E Aronoff; Ann Ragin; Can Wu; Michael Markl; Susanne Schnell; Ali Shaibani; Clancy Blair; Christopher W Kuzawa Journal: Int J Obes (Lond) Date: 2022-02-08 Impact factor: 5.551