4.5 Article

Fast slice-selective radio-frequency excitation pulses for mitigating B-1(+) inhomogeneity in the human brain at 7 tesla

期刊

MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICINE
卷 59, 期 6, 页码 1355-1364

出版社

JOHN WILEY & SONS INC
DOI: 10.1002/mrm.21585

关键词

B-1(+) inhomogeneity mitigation; high field; RF pulse design; 3-D RF excitation; in vivo; sparse approximation

资金

  1. NCRR NIH HHS [P41 RR014075-086768, P41RR14075, P41 RR014075-098608, P41 RR014075, P41 RR014075-098604, P41 RR014075-086772] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIBIB NIH HHS [R01 EB006847-02S1, 1R01EB006847, 1R01EB000790, R01 EB007942, R01 EB006847-01A2, 1R01EB007942, R01 EB000790, R01 EB006847-02, R01 EB007942-01A2, R01 EB006847] Funding Source: Medline
  3. NATIONAL CENTER FOR RESEARCH RESOURCES [P41RR014075] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  4. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF BIOMEDICAL IMAGING AND BIOENGINEERING [R01EB000790, R01EB007942, R01EB006847] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A novel radio-frequency (RF) pulse design algorithm is presented that generates fast slice-selective excitation pulses that mitigate B-1(+) inhomogeneity present in the human brain at high field. The method is provided an estimate of the B-1(+) field in an axial slice of the brain and then optimizes the placement of sinc-like spokes in k(z) via an L-1-norm penalty on candidate (k(x), k(y)) locations; an RF pulse and gradients are then designed based on these weighted points. Mitigation pulses are designed and demonstrated at 7T in a head-shaped water phantom and the brain; in each case, the pulses mitigate a significantly non-uniform transmit profile and produce nearly uniform flip angles across the field of excitation (FOX). The main contribution of this work, the sparsity-enforced spoke placement and pulse design algorithm, is derived for conventional single-channel excitation systems and applied in the brain at 7T, but readily extends to lower field systems, nonbrain applications, and multichannel parallel excitation arrays.

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

4.5
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