4.5 Article

Improvements in Multislice Parallel Imaging Using Radial CAIPIRINHA

Journal

MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICINE
Volume 65, Issue 6, Pages 1630-1637

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/mrm.22752

Keywords

parallel imaging; multi-slice; radial; CAIPIRINHA

Funding

  1. Siemens Healthcare
  2. National Institutes of Health [R01-EB-004637, R01-HL-094557]
  3. Ohio Third Frontier Project Innovation Incentive Fellowship

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Multislice parallel imaging involves the simultaneous sampling of multiple parallel slices which are subsequently separated using parallel imaging reconstruction. The CAIPIRINHA technique improves this reconstruction by manipulating the phase of the RF excitation pulses to shift the aliasing pattern such that there is less aliasing energy to be reconstructed. In this work, it is shown that combining the phase manipulation used in CAIPIRINHA with a non-Cartesian (radial) sampling scheme further decreases the aliasing energy for the parallel imaging algorithm to reconstruct, thereby further increasing the degree to which a multi-channel receiver array can be utilized for parallel imaging acceleration. In radial CAIPIRINHA, individual bands (slices) in a multislice excitation are modulated with view-dependent phase, causing a destructive interference of entire slices. This destructive interference leads to a reduction in aliasing compared to the coherent shifts one observes when using this same technique with a Cartesian trajectory. Recovery of each individual slice is possible because the applied phase pattern is known, and a conjugate-gradient reconstruction algorithm minimizes the contributions from other slices. Results are presented with a standard 12-channel head coil with acceleration factors up to 14, where radial CAIPIRINHA produces an improved reconstruction when compared with Cartesian CAIPIRINHA. Magn Reson Med 65:1630-1637, 2011. (C)2011 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available