Sai Abitha Srinivas1,2, Stephen F Cauley3,4, Jason P Stockmann3,4, Charlotte R Sappo1,2, Christopher E Vaughn1,2, Lawrence L Wald3,4,5, William A Grissom1,2,6,7, Clarissa Z Cooley3,4. 1. Vanderbilt University Institute of Imaging Science, Nashville, Tennessee, USA. 2. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, USA. 3. Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 4. Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Athinoula A Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 5. Harvard-MIT Division of Health Sciences and Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA. 6. Department of Electrical Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, USA. 7. Department of Radiology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Point-of-care MRI requires operation outside of Faraday shielded rooms normally used to block image-degrading electromagnetic interference (EMI). To address this, we introduce the EDITER method (External Dynamic InTerference Estimation and Removal), an external sensor-based method to retrospectively remove image artifacts from time-varying external interference sources. THEORY AND METHODS: The method acquires data from multiple EMI detectors (tuned receive coils as well as untuned electrodes placed on the body) simultaneously with the primary MR coil during and between image data acquisition. We calculate impulse response functions dynamically that map the data from the detectors to the time varying artifacts then remove the transformed detected EMI from the MR data. Performance of the EDITER algorithm was assessed in phantom and in vivo imaging experiments in an 80 mT portable brain MRI in a controlled EMI environment and with an open 47.5 mT MRI scanner in an uncontrolled EMI setting. RESULTS: In the controlled setting, the effectiveness of the EDITER technique was demonstrated for specific types of introduced EMI sources with up to a 97% reduction of structured EMI and up to 76% reduction of broadband EMI in phantom experiments. In the uncontrolled EMI experiments, we demonstrate EMI reductions of up to 99% using an electrode and pick-up coil in vivo. We demonstrate up to a nine-fold improvement in image SNR with the method. CONCLUSION: The EDITER technique is a flexible and robust method to improve image quality in portable MRI systems with minimal passive shielding and could reduce the reliance of MRI on shielded rooms and allow for truly portable MRI.
PURPOSE: Point-of-care MRI requires operation outside of Faraday shielded rooms normally used to block image-degrading electromagnetic interference (EMI). To address this, we introduce the EDITER method (External Dynamic InTerference Estimation and Removal), an external sensor-based method to retrospectively remove image artifacts from time-varying external interference sources. THEORY AND METHODS: The method acquires data from multiple EMI detectors (tuned receive coils as well as untuned electrodes placed on the body) simultaneously with the primary MR coil during and between image data acquisition. We calculate impulse response functions dynamically that map the data from the detectors to the time varying artifacts then remove the transformed detected EMI from the MR data. Performance of the EDITER algorithm was assessed in phantom and in vivo imaging experiments in an 80 mT portable brain MRI in a controlled EMI environment and with an open 47.5 mT MRI scanner in an uncontrolled EMI setting. RESULTS: In the controlled setting, the effectiveness of the EDITER technique was demonstrated for specific types of introduced EMI sources with up to a 97% reduction of structured EMI and up to 76% reduction of broadband EMI in phantom experiments. In the uncontrolled EMI experiments, we demonstrate EMI reductions of up to 99% using an electrode and pick-up coil in vivo. We demonstrate up to a nine-fold improvement in image SNR with the method. CONCLUSION: The EDITER technique is a flexible and robust method to improve image quality in portable MRI systems with minimal passive shielding and could reduce the reliance of MRI on shielded rooms and allow for truly portable MRI.
Authors: Patrick C McDaniel; Clarissa Zimmerman Cooley; Jason P Stockmann; Lawrence L Wald Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2019-06-23 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Jason P Stockmann; Clarissa Z Cooley; Bastien Guerin; Matthew S Rosen; Lawrence L Wald Journal: J Magn Reson Date: 2016-04-08 Impact factor: 2.229
Authors: Nadine N Graedel; Jonathan R Polimeni; Bastien Guerin; Borjan Gagoski; Giorgio Bonmassar; Lawrence L Wald Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2014-02-18 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Thomas O'Reilly; Wouter M Teeuwisse; Danny de Gans; Kirsten Koolstra; Andrew G Webb Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2020-07-05 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Kevin N Sheth; Mercy H Mazurek; Matthew M Yuen; Bradley A Cahn; Jill T Shah; Adrienne Ward; Jennifer A Kim; Emily J Gilmore; Guido J Falcone; Nils Petersen; Kevin T Gobeske; Firas Kaddouh; David Y Hwang; Joseph Schindler; Lauren Sansing; Charles Matouk; Jonathan Rothberg; Gordon Sze; Jonathan Siner; Matthew S Rosen; Serena Spudich; W Taylor Kimberly Journal: JAMA Neurol Date: 2020-09-08 Impact factor: 29.907
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