4.5 Article

Retrospective image correction in the presence of nonlinear temporal magnetic field changes using multichannel navigator echoes

Journal

MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICINE
Volume 68, Issue 6, Pages 1836-1845

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/mrm.24202

Keywords

image reconstruction; spatiotemporal field fluctuations; navigator echoes

Funding

  1. Center for Translational Molecular Medicine (CTMM, Project LeARN) [02N-101]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Spatio-temporal magnetic field changes in the brain caused by breathing or body movements can lead to image artifacts. This is especially a problem in T2*-weighted sequences. With the acquisition of an extra echo (navigator), it is possible to measure the magnetic field change induced frequency offset for a given slice during image acquisition. However, substantial local variation across a slice can occur. This work describes an extension of the conventional navigator technique that improves the estimation of the magnetic field distribution in the brain during strong field fluctuations. This is done using the combination of signals from multiple coil elements, the coil sensitivity profiles, and frequency encoding: termed sensitivity-encoded navigator echoes. In vivo validation was performed in subjects who performed normal breathing, nose touching, and deep breathing during scanning. The sensitivity-encoded navigator technique leads to an error reduction in estimating the field distribution in the brain of 73% +/- 16% compared with 56% +/- 14% for conventional estimation. Image quality can be improved via incorporating this navigator information appropriately into the image reconstruction. When the sensitivity-encoded navigator technique was applied to a T2*-weighted sequence at 7 T, a ghosting reduction of 47% +/- 13% was measured during nose touching experiments compared with no correction. Magn Reson Med, 2012. (c) 2012 Wiley Periodicals, 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