Graham C Wiggins1, Bei Zhang1, and Barbara Dornberger2
1Center for Advanced Imaging Innovation and Research (CAI2R) and Center for Biomedical Imaging, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, United States, 2Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany
Synopsis
For optimal performance an array should conform closely to the anatomy being imaged. Knee coils typically have rigid formers which must be large enough to accommodate most subjects, but which necessarily are not optimal for small ones. We present here a cylindrical surface coil array which can adapt in size while maintaining good tuning, match and decoupling. It is built on a trellis-like structure which controls the configuration and morphs the surface coils.Introduction
Receive array
performance is generally maximized when the array conforms closely to the body.
People vary in size, making it difficult for one coil array to fit optimally on
all subjects. This is particularly true for rigid coils, such as knee coils,
which must be made large enough to accommodate most people, but which will not
be optimal on smaller bodies. With the increasing prevalence of obesity, there
are many people who do not even fit in the standard commercially available knee
coils, and must be imaged with improvised arrangements of body array coils.
Several coil array
designs have been reported which adapt to the size of the object being imaged,
either by allowing fixed-size coil elements to move1 or by
physically stretching coil elements made from copper braid2. Both of
these approaches lead to changes in coil tuning, match and decoupling such that
the optimum noise-matched impedance is not always presented to the preamp. A
size-adjustable stripline head array has been presented which addresses some of
these issues with a mechanically driven decoupling mechanism3. We
present here a cylindrical array in which surface-coil elements of fixed
circumference morph as the array is expanded such that there is little change
in tuning, match or decoupling. An underlying trellis-like framework controls
the coil element configuration. The prototype 3T array is assessed for Q,
S-parameters and SNR on 3 different-sized phantoms corresponding to a range of
human knee dimensions.
Methods
The
underlying framework is a lattice of 5mm wide strips of 2.4mm thick nylon.
Holes were drilled every 5.7mm and the strips cut out using a circuit board router.
Two layers of 72 strips are linked together with nylon screws and nuts to form
a lattice (Fig.1). Changing the angle between the strips in the two layers allows
the lattice to be stretched in one direction or the other. The lattice is
wrapped around to form a cylinder, and circuit-board components are mounted on
the lattice with a hole and slots such that the boards ride on the lattice as
it stretches (Fig.2). More detail of the design principles are given elsewhere
[4]. Multi-strand Teflon-coated wire is used to link the circuit board elements
and is pulled around screws located at the corners of the coil element to
define the coil element shape. The use of 10 nylon strips per coil element width allows a
10% coil overlap for inductive decoupling. The lattice can
expand in diameter from 14.5cm to 20.5cm, morphing the coils from 6.5×9.5cm to
9.5×6.5cm in the process (Fig.3). Each element is tuned to 123.2 MHz with 4
capacitors and has an active detuning trap. The coils were interfaced to the scanner
through an in-house built 8 channel interface. The array was evaluated on three
cylindrical phantoms with ε
r=56.6, σ=0.37
S/m with diameters of 13.4, 16.5 and 19.5 cm. It was also compared to a commercially
available 15 channel knee coil (QED, Mayfield Village, Ohio).
Results
The unloaded-to-loaded
Q ratio was 230/35 for the large phantom, dropping to 230/50 on the small
phantom. A conventional circuit-board coil element of the same size had an
unloaded Q of 337. The elements of the 8 channel array were tuned and matched,
and decoupling was adjusted by moving a wire jumper on the circuit boards. Once
this was set no adjustments were made to the array as it was placed on the
different sized phantoms. S-parameter plots for a pair of coils are shown in
Fig.4. Coil tuning, match and decoupling all remain within acceptable limits as
the array is stretched and the coil elements morph to different shapes. Worst
case S
11 and S
21 are
-12dB and -10.7dB respectively. SNR plots for sum-of-squares reconstruction are
shown in Fig.5. Central SNR increases from 22 to 29.9 to 42.2 as the phantom
size is decreased. For comparison, if the coil remains fixed at the largest
diameter, SNR in the smallest phantom is only 33.4 (Figure 5, fourth column). The
commercial coil, which has a fixed internal diameter of 16cm, provided SNR of
33 in the small phantom. The other phantoms would not fit in it.
Discussion
The coronal
SNR maps show how the z-extent of the trellis array shrinks as the array
diameter increases. Central SNR for the large phantom would be improved if the
array was longer, which could be achieved by adding extra rows. This would also
help match the larger z field of view of the QED coil. This design may have many applications including pediatric coils, head coils and body arrays
5.Acknowledgements
The
Center for Advanced Imaging Innovation and Research (CAI2R, www.cai2r.net) at New York University School of
Medicine is supported by NIH/NIBIB grant number P41 EB017183References
[1] Nordmeyer-Massner
J Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 61:429–438 (2009)
[2] Nordmeyer-Massner
J, Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 67:872–879 (2012)
[3] Adriany
G, Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 59:590–597 (2008)
[4] Wiggins Proc.
ISMRM 2016 (submitted)
[5] Zhang
Proc. ISMRM 2016 (submitted)