Robb, Fraser

AbstractPurposeTo study if adaptive image receive (AIR) receiver coil elements can be configured into a 2D array with high (>45% by diameter) element‐to‐element overlap, allowing improved SNR at depth (0.7–1.5× element diameter) versus conventional (20%) overlap.MethodsAn anterior array composed of twenty 10‐cm diameter elements with 45% overlap arranged into a 4 × 5 grid and a similar 3 × 7 twenty‐one‐element posterior array were constructed. SNR and g‐factor were measured in a pelvic phantom using the new high‐density (HD) arrays (41 total elements) and compared to vendor AIR‐based arrays (30 total elements) with conventional overlap. T2‐weighted fast‐spin‐echo (T2SE) images acquired using both arrays were compared in 20 subjects. SNR was estimated in vivo. Results were compared blindly by three uroradiologists using a five‐point scale. Images using the HD arrays were also compared to a set of images acquired over a range of acceleration factors (R = 2.0, 2.5, 3.0) with the conventional arrays.ResultsSNR within the phantom was on average 15% higher for R = 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 using the HD arrays. Across the 20 subjects SNR within the prostate was 11% higher and assessed radiologically as significantly higher (p < 0.001) for the HD versus conventional arrays. At all acceleration factors the new HD arrays outperformed the conventional arrays (p ≤ 0.01), allowing increased R for similar SNR.ConclusionAIR elements can be configured into 2D arrays with high (45%) element‐to‐element overlap, consistently providing increased SNR at depth versus arrays with conventional (20%) overlap. The SNR improvement allows increased acceleration in T2SE prostate MRI.

Purpose: To evaluate the performance of a new, highly flexible radiofrequency (RF) coil system for imaging patients undergoing MR simulation. Methods: Volumetric phantom and in vivo images were acquired with a commercially available and prototype RF coil set. Phantom evaluation was performed using a silicone-filled humanoid phantom of the head and shoulders. In vivo assessment was performed in five healthy and six patient subjects. Phantom data included T1-weighted volumetric imaging, while in vivo acquisitions included both T1- and T2-weighted volumetric imaging. Signal to noise ratio (SNR) and uniformity metrics were calculated in the phantom data, while SNR values were calculated in vivo. Statistical significance was tested by means of a non-parametric analysis of variance test. Results: At a threshold of p = 0.05, differences in measured SNR distributions within the entire phantom volume were statistically different in two of the three paired coil set comparisons. Differences in per slice average SNR between the two coil sets were all statistically significant, as well as differences in per slice image uniformity. For patients, SNRs within the entire imaging volume were statistically significantly different in four of the nine comparisons and seven of the nine comparisons performed on the per slice average SNR values. For healthy subjects, SNRs within the entire imaging volume were statistically significantly different in seven of the nine comparisons and eight of the nine comparisons when per slice average SNR was tested. Conclusions: Phantom and in vivo results demonstrate that image quality obtained from the novel flexible RF coil set was similar or improved over the conventional coil system. The results also demonstrate that image quality is impacted by the specific coil configurations used for imaging and should be matched appropriately to the anatomic site imaged to ensure optimal and reproducible image quality.