4.4 Review

Radio frequency coil technology for small-animal MRI

期刊

NMR IN BIOMEDICINE
卷 20, 期 3, 页码 304-325

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/nbm.1149

关键词

small-animal MRI; surface coils; circular polarization volume coils; phased arrays; low-noise preamplifiers; decoupling

资金

  1. NIBIB NIH HHS [R44 EB 000445-03] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A review of the theory, technology, and use of radio frequency (RF) coils for small-animal MRI is presented. It includes a brief overview of MR signal-to-noise (S/N) analysis and discussions of the various coils commonly used in small-animal MR: surface coils, linear volume coils, birdcages, and their derivatives. The scope is limited to mid-range coils, i.e. coils where the product (fd) of the frequency f and the coil diameter d is in the range 2-30 MHz-m. Common applications include mouse brain and body coils from 125 to 750 MHz, rat body coils up to 500 MHz, and small surface coils at all fields. In this regime, all the sources of loss (coil, capacitor, sample, shield, and transmission lines) are important. All such losses may be accurately captured in some modern full-wave 3D electromagnetics software, and new simulation results are presented for a selection of surface coils using Microwave Studio 2006 by Computer Simulation Technology, showing the dramatic importance of the 'lift-off effect'. Standard linear circuit simulators have been shown to be useful in optimization of complex coil tuning and matching circuits. There appears to be considerable potential for trading S/N for speed using phased arrays, especially for a larger field of view. Circuit simulators are shown to be useful for optimal mismatching of ultra-low-noise preamps based on the enhancement-mode pseudomorphic high-electron-mobility transistor for optimal coil decoupling in phased arrays. Cryogenically cooled RF coils are shown to offer considerable opportunity for future gains in S/N in smaller samples. Copyright (C) 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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

4.4
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