4.7 Article

High resolution whole brain diffusion imaging at 7 T for the Human Connectome Project

期刊

NEUROIMAGE
卷 122, 期 -, 页码 318-331

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.08.004

关键词

-

资金

  1. Human Connectome Project from the 16 Institutes and Centers of the National Institutes of Health [1U54MH091657]
  2. Biotechnology Research Center (BTRC) grant from NIBIB [P41 EB015894]
  3. NINDS Institutional Center Core Grant [P30 NS076408]
  4. EPSRC [EP/L023067/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  5. MRC [MR/L009013/1, G0700399] Funding Source: UKRI
  6. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/L023067/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  7. Medical Research Council [G0700399, MR/L009013/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mapping structural connectivity in healthy adults for the Human Connectome Project (HCP) benefits from high quality, high resolution, multiband (MB)-accelerated whole brain diffusion MRI (dMRI). Acquiring such data at ultrahigh fields (7 T and above) can improve intrinsic signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), but suffers from shorter T-2 and T-2. relaxation times, increased B-1(+) inhomogeneity (resulting in signal loss in cerebellar and temporal lobe regions), and increased power deposition (i.e. specific absorption rate (SAR)), thereby limiting our ability to reduce the repetition time (TR). Here, we present recent developments and optimizations in 7 T image acquisitions for the HCP that allow us to efficiently obtain high quality, high resolution whole brain in-vivo dMRI data at 7 T. These data show spatial details typically seen only in ex-vivo studies and complement already very high quality 3 T HCP data in the same subjects. The advances are the result of intensive pilot studies aimed at mitigating the limitations of dMRI at 7 T. The data quality and methods described here are representative of the datasets that will be made freely available to the community in 2015. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据