4.5 Article

Forecasting the quality of water-suppressed 1H MR spectra based on a single-shot water scan

期刊

MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICINE
卷 78, 期 2, 页码 441-451

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/mrm.26389

关键词

Magnetic resonance spectroscopy; brain; quantification error; line width; signal-to-noise ratio; quality

资金

  1. TRANSACT [PITN-GA-2012-316679]
  2. Swiss National Science Foundation [320030_156952]
  3. Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) [320030_156952] Funding Source: Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PurposeTo investigate whether an initial non-water-suppressed acquisition that provides information about the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and linewidth is enough to forecast the maximally achievable final spectral quality and thus inform the operator whether the foreseen number of averages and achieved field homogeneity is adequate. MethodsA large range of spectra with varying SNR and linewidth was simulated and fitted with popular fitting programs to determine the dependence of fitting errors on linewidth and SNR. A tool to forecast variance based on a single acquisition was developed and its performance evaluated on simulated and in vivo data obtained at 3 Tesla from various brain regions and acquisition settings. ResultsA strong correlation to real uncertainties in estimated metabolite contents was found for the forecast values and the Cramer-Rao lower bounds obtained from the water-suppressed spectra. ConclusionIt appears to be possible to forecast the best-case errors associated with specific metabolites to be found in model fits of water-suppressed spectra based on a single water scan. Thus, nonspecialist operators will be able to judge ahead of time whether the planned acquisition can possibly be of sufficient quality to answer the targeted clinical question or whether it needs more averages or improved shimming. Magn Reson Med 78:441-451, 2017. (c) 2016 International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine

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