Ultrahigh Fields: What You Want & What You Don't
Kamil Ugurbil1

1Center for Magnetic Resonance Research (CMRR), University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States

Synopsis

Since the introduction of the first 7 Tesla system in 1999, steady improvements in instrumentation and ever expanding armamentarium of image acquisition and engineering solutions to challenges posed by ultrahigh fields (UHF) has brought UHF imaging to exquisite anatomical detail and biological information content in many organ systems of the human body. However, like all technologies, magnetic resonance applications at UHF have applications-specific advantages and limitations. This lecture will aim to clarify the primary advantages that we should exploit (“what we want”), while avoiding some of the pitfalls that detract from these advantages (“what you don’t want”).

TARGET/Audience

Investigators interested in using ultrahigh field (7 Tesla and higher) magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy for research and/or clinical applications

PURPOSE

Following early efforts in applying nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy to study biological processes in intact systems, and particularly since the introduction of 4 Tesla human scanners circa 1990, rapid progress has been made in imaging and spectroscopy studies of humans at 4 Tesla and animal models at 9.4 Tesla, leading to the introduction of 7 Tesla and higher magnetic fields (i.e. Ultrahigh Fields (UHF)) for human investigation at about the turn of the century (1). Work conducted on these platforms revealed the existence of significant challenges (e.g. (1,2)) to working with objects the size of the human head and the torso at such high magnetic fields. Emergence of numerous technological solutions to these challenges (e.g. (1-4)), however, have ultimately led to the demonstration of significant UHF advantages in signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and biological information content (e.g. (1,4-8)). Nevertheless, it is still common to encounter not only skeptics who often posit that everything can be accomplished at 3 or even 1.5T, but also ultra-optimists who expound unrealistic capabilities. For example, it is virtually impossible today to encounter a presentation on UHF imaging and/or spectroscopy application in humans or animal model systems that would not enthusiastically list as a foregone conclusion that SNR increases with magnetic field strength. Indeed it does (e.g. (1,9)), but this increase is spatially non-uniform, and depends a lot on transmit and receive RF coil geometries and the methods employed for spin-excitation and signal detection. In addition, the intrinsic gain in SNR can be lost in many applications during contrast encoding or due to suboptimal instrumentation and/or pulse sequences. This lecture, as the title suggests, will aim to clarify the primary advantages that we should exploit (“what we want”), while avoiding some of the pitfalls that detract from these advantages (“what you don’t want”).

DISCUSSION

The primary difference of UHF from lower fields is the behavior of electromagnetic waves employed at the radiofrequencies (RF) corresponding to resonance frequency of hydrogen nuclei (i.e. protons). Particularly at 7 Tesla and higher magnetic fields, the RF increasingly moves away from the near-field towards the far-field electromagnetic regime as the wavelengths become smaller than the object dimensions. Consequently, RF behavior at UHF becomes characterized by attenuated traveling waves in the human body; this leads to image non-uniformities for a given sample-coil configuration because of spatially varying destructive and constructive interferences. These non-uniformities were initially considered detrimental to progress of imaging at high magnetic field strengths. However, they are advantageous for parallel imaging in signal reception and transmission, two critical technologies that account, to a large extend, for the success of ultrahigh fields (1,2), including the mitigation of power deposition (i.e. SAR). The use of these new technologies, together with improvements in instrumentation and imaging methods, have led to unprecedented gains in spatial resolution and specificity at 7T for functional imaging (e.g. (1,5,6,10)). However, there are numerous significant considerations that go into choosing the functional contrast encoding method with respect to the specificity (i.e. fidelity or accuracy) relative to the actual sites of neuronal activity; a single ideal solution that is applicable in all cases does not yet exist (1,11-13). With respect to revealing brain anatomy, studies of microstructure in the brain benefit tremendously from UHF due to new contrast mechanisms that become robustly feasible (7). However, techniques like diffusion imaging for tractography (dMRI), a popular approach employed in probing anatomical connections in the brain, faces challenges: While there are gains to be realized at UHF from the elevation in intrinsic SNR, losses are encountered in dMRI during contrast encoding due to shorter T2 at UFH (14,15); such losses can be minimized so that UHF provide a net advantage for dMRI (14,15) but this requires exceptional gradient performance, which has its unique challenges (16). Spectroscopy measurements with 1H and spectroscopy and/or imaging studies with X- nuclei (e.g., 31P, 17O, and 23Na) obtained at 7T, and subsequently at 9.4T by several laboratories have provided neurochemical and metabolic information in the human brain with increasing biomedical relevance (e.g. (17,18)). Unique kinetic studies of intracellular enzymatic rates that were previously possible only in cells in suspension or perfused organs, were performed two decades later for the first time in the human brain at 7T. However, significant gains in spatial resolution are still necessary for these techniques to achieve widespread utility and biomedical impact. Until recently, all the ultrahigh field studies were in the brain. Imaging in the human torso at 7T is a significantly more challenging goal due to the relative dimensions of the targeted object versus the RF wavelength employed. Nevertheless, 7T imaging in the human torso was demonstrated in 2008 and 2009, thus starting a new burgeoning activity in several laboratories (4). However, further significant technological developments, primarily with respect to RF coils, parallel transmit methods, and pulse sequences are still needed for optimal applications that can actually compete with the refined protocols of 3Tesla.

CONCLUSIONS

Since the introduction of the first 7T system in 1999, steady improvements in high field instrumentation and ever expanding armamentarium of image acquisition and engineering solutions to challenges posed by ultrahigh fields has brought imaging to exquisite anatomical detail and biological information content in many organ systems of the human body. However, obtaining such data requires cognizance of the increased complexity that characterizes UHF imaging, and judicious choice of hardware, imaging approaches, and acquisition parameters. Especially with the introduction of commercial instruments with increasing sophistication, UHF advances are sure to continue unabated for years to come as the incessant creativity of the MR community produces new capabilities and overcome impediments. Further translation of these improvements to lower field clinical systems to achieve new capabilities and to magnetic fields significantly higher than 7 Tesla to enable human imaging with increasing biological importance is inescapable.

Acknowledgements

The work relevant to this lecture carried out by the author and colleagues in the Center for Magnetic Resonance Research (CMRR), University of Minnesota was supported by NIH grants P41 EB015894, U54 MH091657 (the Human Connectome Project), U01 EB025144, R24 MH106049, and P30 NS076408.

References

All references provided in this abstract are to review articles. Readers can access individual contributions relevant for this topic through the references given in these review articles.

1. Ugurbil K. Imaging at ultrahigh magnetic fields: History, challenges, and solutions. Neuroimage 2018;168:7-32.

2. Ugurbil K. Magnetic resonance imaging at ultrahigh fields. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2014;61(5):1364-1379.

3. Stockmann JP, Wald LL. In vivo B0 field shimming methods for MRI at 7T. Neuroimage 2018;168:71-87.

4. Niendorf T, Graessl A, Thalhammer C, Dieringer MA, Kraus O, Santoro D, Fuchs K, Hezel F, Waiczies S, Ittermann B, Winter L. Progress and promises of human cardiac magnetic resonance at ultrahigh fields: a physics perspective. J Magn Reson 2013;229:208-222.

5. De Martino F, Yacoub E, Kemper V, Moerel M, Uludag K, De Weerd P, Ugurbil K, Goebel R, Formisano E. The impact of ultra-high field MRI on cognitive and computational neuroimaging. Neuroimage 2018;168:366-382.

6. Dumoulin SO, Fracasso A, van der Zwaag W, Siero JCW, Petridou N. Ultra-high field MRI: Advancing systems neuroscience towards mesoscopic human brain function. Neuroimage 2018;168:345-357.

7. Duyn JH. Studying brain microstructure with magnetic susceptibility contrast at high-field. Neuroimage 2018;168:152-161.

8. Kraff O, Fischer A, Nagel AM, Monninghoff C, Ladd ME. MRI at 7 Tesla and above: demonstrated and potential capabilities. J Magn Reson Imaging 2015;41(1):13-33.

9. Ladd ME. The quest for higher sensitivity in MRI through higher magnetic fields. Z Med Phys 2018;28(1):1-3.

10. Yacoub E, Wald LL. Pushing the spatio-temporal limits of MRI and fMRI. Neuroimage 2018;164:1-3.

11. Marques JP, Norris DG. How to choose the right MR sequence for your research question at 7T and above? Neuroimage 2018;168:119-140.

12. Ugurbil K. What is feasible with imaging human brain function and connectivity using functional magnetic resonance imaging. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 2016;371(1705).

13. Kashyap S, Ivanov D, Havlicek M, Poser BA, Uludag K. Impact of acquisition and analysis strategies on cortical depth-dependent fMRI. Neuroimage 2018;168:332-344.

14. Gallichan D. Diffusion MRI of the human brain at ultra-high field (UHF): A review. Neuroimage 2018;168:172-180.

15. Ugurbil K, Xu J, Auerbach EJ, Moeller S, Vu AT, Duarte-Carvajalino JM, Lenglet C, Wu X, Schmitter S, Van de Moortele PF, Strupp J, Sapiro G, De Martino F, Wang D, Harel N, Garwood M, Chen L, Feinberg DA, Smith SM, Miller KL, Sotiropoulos SN, Jbabdi S, Andersson JL, Behrens TE, Glasser MF, Van Essen DC, Yacoub E, Consortium WU-MH. Pushing spatial and temporal resolution for functional and diffusion MRI in the Human Connectome Project. Neuroimage 2013;80:80-104.

16. Winkler SA, Schmitt F, Landes H, de Bever J, Wade T, Alejski A, Rutt BK. Gradient and shim technologies for ultra high field MRI. Neuroimage 2018;168:59-70.

17. Ugurbil K, Adriany G, Andersen P, Chen W, Garwood M, Gruetter R, Henry PG, Kim SG, Lieu H, Tkac I, Vaughan T, Van De Moortele PF, Yacoub E, Zhu XH. Ultrahigh field magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy. Magn Reson Imaging 2003;21(10):1263-1281.

18. Thulborn KR. Quantitative sodium MR imaging: A review of its evolving role in medicine. Neuroimage 2018;168:250-268.

Proc. Intl. Soc. Mag. Reson. Med. 26 (2018)