Ultimate intrinsic signal‐to‐noise ratio for parallel MRI: Electromagnetic field considerations

A method is described for establishing an upper bound on the spatial encoding capabilities of coil arrays in parallel MRI. Ultimate intrinsic signal‐to‐noise ratio (SNR), independent of any particular conductor arrangement, is calculated by expressing arbitrary coil sensitivities in terms of a complete set of basis functions that satisfy Maxwell's equations within the sample and performing parallel imaging reconstructions using these basis functions. The dependence of the ultimate intrinsic SNR on a variety of experimental conditions is explored and a physically intuitive explanation for the observed behavior is provided based on a comparison between the electromagnetic wavelength and the distance between aliasing points. Imaging at high field strength, with correspondingly short wavelength, is shown to offer advantages for parallel imaging beyond those already expected due to the larger available spin polarization. One‐dimensional undersampling of k‐space yields a steep drop in attainable SNR for more than a 5‐fold reduction of scan time, while 2D undersampling permits access to much higher degrees of acceleration. Increased tissue conductivity decreases baseline SNR, but improves parallel imaging performance. A procedure is also provided for generating the optimal coil sensitivity pattern for a given acceleration, which will serve as a useful guide for future coil designs. Magn Reson Med 50:1018–1030, 2003. © 2003 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

[1]  P. Roemer,et al.  The NMR phased array , 1990, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[2]  C. Gabriel Compilation of the Dielectric Properties of Body Tissues at RF and Microwave Frequencies. , 1996 .

[3]  W. Manning,et al.  Simultaneous acquisition of spatial harmonics (SMASH): Fast imaging with radiofrequency coil arrays , 1997, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[4]  E. Atalar,et al.  Ultimate intrinsic signal‐to‐noise ratio in MRI , 1998, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[5]  J. Schotland,et al.  Generalized reciprocity. , 1998, Journal of magnetic resonance.

[6]  Yu-Chung N. Cheng,et al.  Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Physical Principles and Sequence Design , 1999 .

[7]  P. Boesiger,et al.  SENSE: Sensitivity encoding for fast MRI , 1999, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[8]  D. Hoult The principle of reciprocity in signal strength calculations—a mathematical guide , 2000 .

[9]  Peter Boesiger,et al.  Cardiac real‐time imaging using SENSE , 2000 .

[10]  R. Edelman,et al.  Contrast-enhanced 3D MR angiography with simultaneous acquisition of spatial harmonics: A pilot study. , 2000, Radiology.

[11]  D. Hoult Sensitivity and Power Deposition in a High‐Field Imaging Experiment , 2000, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[12]  D. Sodickson Tailored SMASH image reconstructions for robust in vivo parallel MR imaging , 2000, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[13]  K P Pruessmann,et al.  Cardiac real-time imaging using SENSE. SENSitivity Encoding scheme. , 2000, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[14]  K P Pruessmann,et al.  Sensitivity‐encoded spectroscopic imaging , 2001, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[15]  P M Jakob,et al.  VD‐AUTO‐SMASH imaging , 2001, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[16]  D. Sodickson,et al.  A generalized approach to parallel magnetic resonance imaging. , 2001, Medical physics.

[17]  P. Boesiger,et al.  Specific coil design for SENSE: A six‐element cardiac array , 2001, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[18]  K. Uğurbil,et al.  Analysis of wave behavior in lossy dielectric samples at high field , 2002, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[19]  Daniel K Sodickson,et al.  Self‐calibrating parallel imaging with automatic coil sensitivity extraction , 2002, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[20]  The Effect of Inductive Coupling on Parallel Image Reconstructions , 2002 .

[21]  L. J. Anthony,et al.  CRC Concise Encyclopedia of Mathematics (2nd edition) , 2003 .