View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Multi‐center benchmarking of cervical spinal cord RF coils for 7 T MRI: A traveling spines study.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Multi‐center benchmarking of cervical spinal cord RF coils for 7 T MRI: A traveling spines study.
Authors: Alonso‐Ortiz, Eva1,2 (AUTHOR) eva.alonso-ortiz@polymtl.ca, Papp, Daniel1 (AUTHOR), Barry, Robert L.3,4,5 (AUTHOR), Poëti, Kyota6 (AUTHOR), Seifert, Alan C.7 (AUTHOR), Gilbert, Kyle M.8,9 (AUTHOR), Lopez‐Rios, Nibardo1 (AUTHOR), Paska, Jan1 (AUTHOR), Eippert, Falk10 (AUTHOR), Weiskopf, Nikolaus11,12,13 (AUTHOR), Beghini, Laura14 (AUTHOR), Graedel, Nadine N.15 (AUTHOR), Trampel, Robert11 (AUTHOR), Callaghan, Martina F.15 (AUTHOR), Aigner, Christoph S.16,17 (AUTHOR), Freund, Patrick11,18 (AUTHOR), Seif, Maryam11,18 (AUTHOR), Destruel, Aurélien19,20 (AUTHOR), Callot, Virginie19,20 (AUTHOR), Vannesjo, Johanna14 (AUTHOR)
Source: Magnetic Resonance in Medicine. Sep2025, Vol. 94 Issue 3, p1339-1355. 17p.
Subjects: Cervical cord, Spinal cord, Quality control, Magnetic resonance imaging, Spine
Abstract: Purpose: The depth within the body, small diameter, long length, and varying tissue surrounding the spinal cord impose specific considerations when designing RF coils. The optimal coil configuration for 7 T cervical spinal cord MRI is unknown and currently there are very few coil options. The purpose of this work was (1) to establish a quality control protocol for evaluating 7 T cervical spinal cord coils, and (2) to use that protocol to evaluate the performance of four different coil designs. Methods: Three healthy volunteers and a custom anthropomorphic phantom (the traveling spines cohort) were scanned at seven 7 T imaging centers using a common protocol and each center's specific cervical spinal cord coil. Four different coil designs were tested (two in‐house, one Rapid Biomedical, and one MRI.TOOLS design). Results: The Rapid Biomedical coil was found to have the highest B1+$$ {\mathrm{B}}_1^{+} $$ efficiency, whereas one of the in‐house designs (NeuroPoly Lab) had the highest SNR and the largest spinal cord coverage. The MRI.TOOLS coil had the most uniform B1+$$ {\mathrm{B}}_1^{+} $$ profile along the cervical spinal cord; however, it was limited in its ability to provide the requested flip angles (especially for larger individuals). The latter was also the case for the second in‐house coil (MSSM). Conclusion: The results of this study serve as a guide for the spinal cord MRI community in selecting the most suitable coil based on specific requirements and offer a standardized protocol for assessing future coils. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Engineering Source
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
Text:
  Availability: 1
Header DbId: egs
DbLabel: Engineering Source
An: 186342851
AccessLevel: 6
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Multi‐center benchmarking of cervical spinal cord RF coils for 7 T MRI: A traveling spines study.
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Alonso‐Ortiz%2C+Eva%22">Alonso‐Ortiz, Eva</searchLink><relatesTo>1,2</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<i> eva.alonso-ortiz@polymtl.ca</i><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Papp%2C+Daniel%22">Papp, Daniel</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Barry%2C+Robert+L%2E%22">Barry, Robert L.</searchLink><relatesTo>3,4,5</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Poëti%2C+Kyota%22">Poëti, Kyota</searchLink><relatesTo>6</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Seifert%2C+Alan+C%2E%22">Seifert, Alan C.</searchLink><relatesTo>7</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Gilbert%2C+Kyle+M%2E%22">Gilbert, Kyle M.</searchLink><relatesTo>8,9</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Lopez‐Rios%2C+Nibardo%22">Lopez‐Rios, Nibardo</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Paska%2C+Jan%22">Paska, Jan</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Eippert%2C+Falk%22">Eippert, Falk</searchLink><relatesTo>10</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Weiskopf%2C+Nikolaus%22">Weiskopf, Nikolaus</searchLink><relatesTo>11,12,13</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Beghini%2C+Laura%22">Beghini, Laura</searchLink><relatesTo>14</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Graedel%2C+Nadine+N%2E%22">Graedel, Nadine N.</searchLink><relatesTo>15</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Trampel%2C+Robert%22">Trampel, Robert</searchLink><relatesTo>11</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Callaghan%2C+Martina+F%2E%22">Callaghan, Martina F.</searchLink><relatesTo>15</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Aigner%2C+Christoph+S%2E%22">Aigner, Christoph S.</searchLink><relatesTo>16,17</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Freund%2C+Patrick%22">Freund, Patrick</searchLink><relatesTo>11,18</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Seif%2C+Maryam%22">Seif, Maryam</searchLink><relatesTo>11,18</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Destruel%2C+Aurélien%22">Destruel, Aurélien</searchLink><relatesTo>19,20</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Callot%2C+Virginie%22">Callot, Virginie</searchLink><relatesTo>19,20</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Vannesjo%2C+Johanna%22">Vannesjo, Johanna</searchLink><relatesTo>14</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Magnetic+Resonance+in+Medicine%22">Magnetic Resonance in Medicine</searchLink>. Sep2025, Vol. 94 Issue 3, p1339-1355. 17p.
– Name: Subject
  Label: Subjects
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cervical+cord%22">Cervical cord</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Spinal+cord%22">Spinal cord</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Quality+control%22">Quality control</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Magnetic+resonance+imaging%22">Magnetic resonance imaging</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Spine%22">Spine</searchLink>
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Purpose: The depth within the body, small diameter, long length, and varying tissue surrounding the spinal cord impose specific considerations when designing RF coils. The optimal coil configuration for 7 T cervical spinal cord MRI is unknown and currently there are very few coil options. The purpose of this work was (1) to establish a quality control protocol for evaluating 7 T cervical spinal cord coils, and (2) to use that protocol to evaluate the performance of four different coil designs. Methods: Three healthy volunteers and a custom anthropomorphic phantom (the traveling spines cohort) were scanned at seven 7 T imaging centers using a common protocol and each center's specific cervical spinal cord coil. Four different coil designs were tested (two in‐house, one Rapid Biomedical, and one MRI.TOOLS design). Results: The Rapid Biomedical coil was found to have the highest B1+$$ {\mathrm{B}}_1^{+} $$ efficiency, whereas one of the in‐house designs (NeuroPoly Lab) had the highest SNR and the largest spinal cord coverage. The MRI.TOOLS coil had the most uniform B1+$$ {\mathrm{B}}_1^{+} $$ profile along the cervical spinal cord; however, it was limited in its ability to provide the requested flip angles (especially for larger individuals). The latter was also the case for the second in‐house coil (MSSM). Conclusion: The results of this study serve as a guide for the spinal cord MRI community in selecting the most suitable coil based on specific requirements and offer a standardized protocol for assessing future coils. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
– Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright
  Label:
  Group: Ab
  Data: <i>Copyright of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=egs&AN=186342851
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1002/mrm.30551
    Languages:
      – Code: eng
        Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 17
        StartPage: 1339
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Cervical cord
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Spinal cord
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Quality control
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Magnetic resonance imaging
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Spine
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Multi‐center benchmarking of cervical spinal cord RF coils for 7 T MRI: A traveling spines study.
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Alonso‐Ortiz, Eva
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Papp, Daniel
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Barry, Robert L.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Poëti, Kyota
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Seifert, Alan C.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Gilbert, Kyle M.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Lopez‐Rios, Nibardo
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Paska, Jan
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Eippert, Falk
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Weiskopf, Nikolaus
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Beghini, Laura
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Graedel, Nadine N.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Trampel, Robert
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Callaghan, Martina F.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Aigner, Christoph S.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Freund, Patrick
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Seif, Maryam
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Destruel, Aurélien
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Callot, Virginie
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Vannesjo, Johanna
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 09
              Text: Sep2025
              Type: published
              Y: 2025
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 07403194
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 94
            – Type: issue
              Value: 3
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
              Type: main
ResultId 1