Eva Alonso-Ortiz, Daniel Papp, Robert L Barry, Kyota Poëti, Alan C Seifert, Kyle M Gilbert, Nibardo Lopez-Rios, Jan Paska, Falk Eippert, Nikolaus Weiskopf, Laura Beghini, Nadine N Graedel, Robert Trampel, Martina F Callaghan, Christoph S Aigner, Patrick Freund, Maryam Seif, Aurélien Destruel, Virginie Callot, Johanna Vannesjo, Julien Cohen-Adad
{"title":"用于7 T MRI的颈脊髓射频线圈的多中心基准:一项行棘研究。","authors":"Eva Alonso-Ortiz, Daniel Papp, Robert L Barry, Kyota Poëti, Alan C Seifert, Kyle M Gilbert, Nibardo Lopez-Rios, Jan Paska, Falk Eippert, Nikolaus Weiskopf, Laura Beghini, Nadine N Graedel, Robert Trampel, Martina F Callaghan, Christoph S Aigner, Patrick Freund, Maryam Seif, Aurélien Destruel, Virginie Callot, Johanna Vannesjo, Julien Cohen-Adad","doi":"10.1002/mrm.30551","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The depth within the body, small diameter, long length, and varying tissue surrounding the spinal cord impose specific considerations when designing RF coils. The optimal coil configuration for 7 T cervical spinal cord MRI is unknown and currently there are very few coil options. The purpose of this work was (1) to establish a quality control protocol for evaluating 7 T cervical spinal cord coils, and (2) to use that protocol to evaluate the performance of four different coil designs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three healthy volunteers and a custom anthropomorphic phantom (the traveling spines cohort) were scanned at seven 7 T imaging centers using a common protocol and each center's specific cervical spinal cord coil. Four different coil designs were tested (two in-house, one Rapid Biomedical, and one MRI.TOOLS design).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Rapid Biomedical coil was found to have the highest <math> <semantics> <mrow><msubsup><mi>B</mi> <mn>1</mn> <mo>+</mo></msubsup> </mrow> <annotation>$$ {\\mathrm{B}}_1^{+} $$</annotation></semantics> </math> efficiency, whereas one of the in-house designs (NeuroPoly Lab) had the highest SNR and the largest spinal cord coverage. The MRI.TOOLS coil had the most uniform <math> <semantics> <mrow><msubsup><mi>B</mi> <mn>1</mn> <mo>+</mo></msubsup> </mrow> <annotation>$$ {\\mathrm{B}}_1^{+} $$</annotation></semantics> </math> profile along the cervical spinal cord; however, it was limited in its ability to provide the requested flip angles (especially for larger individuals). The latter was also the case for the second in-house coil (MSSM).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results of this study serve as a guide for the spinal cord MRI community in selecting the most suitable coil based on specific requirements and offer a standardized protocol for assessing future coils.</p>","PeriodicalId":18065,"journal":{"name":"Magnetic Resonance in Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Multi-center benchmarking of cervical spinal cord RF coils for 7 T MRI: A traveling spines study.\",\"authors\":\"Eva Alonso-Ortiz, Daniel Papp, Robert L Barry, Kyota Poëti, Alan C Seifert, Kyle M Gilbert, Nibardo Lopez-Rios, Jan Paska, Falk Eippert, Nikolaus Weiskopf, Laura Beghini, Nadine N Graedel, Robert Trampel, Martina F Callaghan, Christoph S Aigner, Patrick Freund, Maryam Seif, Aurélien Destruel, Virginie Callot, Johanna Vannesjo, Julien Cohen-Adad\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/mrm.30551\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The depth within the body, small diameter, long length, and varying tissue surrounding the spinal cord impose specific considerations when designing RF coils. The optimal coil configuration for 7 T cervical spinal cord MRI is unknown and currently there are very few coil options. The purpose of this work was (1) to establish a quality control protocol for evaluating 7 T cervical spinal cord coils, and (2) to use that protocol to evaluate the performance of four different coil designs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three healthy volunteers and a custom anthropomorphic phantom (the traveling spines cohort) were scanned at seven 7 T imaging centers using a common protocol and each center's specific cervical spinal cord coil. Four different coil designs were tested (two in-house, one Rapid Biomedical, and one MRI.TOOLS design).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Rapid Biomedical coil was found to have the highest <math> <semantics> <mrow><msubsup><mi>B</mi> <mn>1</mn> <mo>+</mo></msubsup> </mrow> <annotation>$$ {\\\\mathrm{B}}_1^{+} $$</annotation></semantics> </math> efficiency, whereas one of the in-house designs (NeuroPoly Lab) had the highest SNR and the largest spinal cord coverage. The MRI.TOOLS coil had the most uniform <math> <semantics> <mrow><msubsup><mi>B</mi> <mn>1</mn> <mo>+</mo></msubsup> </mrow> <annotation>$$ {\\\\mathrm{B}}_1^{+} $$</annotation></semantics> </math> profile along the cervical spinal cord; however, it was limited in its ability to provide the requested flip angles (especially for larger individuals). The latter was also the case for the second in-house coil (MSSM).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results of this study serve as a guide for the spinal cord MRI community in selecting the most suitable coil based on specific requirements and offer a standardized protocol for assessing future coils.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18065,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Magnetic Resonance in Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Magnetic Resonance in Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.30551\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Magnetic Resonance in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.30551","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Multi-center benchmarking of cervical spinal cord RF coils for 7 T MRI: A traveling spines study.
Purpose: The depth within the body, small diameter, long length, and varying tissue surrounding the spinal cord impose specific considerations when designing RF coils. The optimal coil configuration for 7 T cervical spinal cord MRI is unknown and currently there are very few coil options. The purpose of this work was (1) to establish a quality control protocol for evaluating 7 T cervical spinal cord coils, and (2) to use that protocol to evaluate the performance of four different coil designs.
Methods: Three healthy volunteers and a custom anthropomorphic phantom (the traveling spines cohort) were scanned at seven 7 T imaging centers using a common protocol and each center's specific cervical spinal cord coil. Four different coil designs were tested (two in-house, one Rapid Biomedical, and one MRI.TOOLS design).
Results: The Rapid Biomedical coil was found to have the highest efficiency, whereas one of the in-house designs (NeuroPoly Lab) had the highest SNR and the largest spinal cord coverage. The MRI.TOOLS coil had the most uniform profile along the cervical spinal cord; however, it was limited in its ability to provide the requested flip angles (especially for larger individuals). The latter was also the case for the second in-house coil (MSSM).
Conclusion: The results of this study serve as a guide for the spinal cord MRI community in selecting the most suitable coil based on specific requirements and offer a standardized protocol for assessing future coils.
期刊介绍:
Magnetic Resonance in Medicine (Magn Reson Med) is an international journal devoted to the publication of original investigations concerned with all aspects of the development and use of nuclear magnetic resonance and electron paramagnetic resonance techniques for medical applications. Reports of original investigations in the areas of mathematics, computing, engineering, physics, biophysics, chemistry, biochemistry, and physiology directly relevant to magnetic resonance will be accepted, as well as methodology-oriented clinical studies.