Nikolai Avdievich1, Georgiy Solomakha2, Loreen Ruhm1, Anke Henning1,3, and Klaus Scheffler1,4
1Max Planck Institute for Bilogical Cybernetics, Tuebingen, Germany, 2Nanophotonics and Metamaterials, ITMO University, St. Petersburg, Russian Federation, 3Advanced Imaging Research Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States, 4Department for Biomedical Magnetic Resonance, University of Tübingen, Tuebingen, Germany
Synopsis
Dipole
antennas have been successfully utilized at ultra-high fields (UHF, >7
T) as elements of human body arrays. Usage of dipoles for UHF human head arrays
is still under development. In this case, dipoles must be made much shorter,
and placed at a relatively large distance to the head. As a result, dipoles are
not well loaded and are often purely decoupled. In this work, we developed a novel method of
decoupling of adjacent dipole antennas, and used this technique while constructing
a novel 9.4 T human head TxRx dipole array coil. The array demonstrates good
decoupling and full-brain coverage.
Purpose:
To improve the
transmit (Tx) performance of a human head array at 9.4 T (400 MHz), a novel method of decoupling
adjacent dipole antenna elements was developed and evaluated.Introduction:
Dipole antennas have
been recently introduced to the MRI field (1) and successfully utilized mostly
as elements of ultra-high field (UHF, > 7 T) human body arrays (1-3).
Usage of dipole antennas for UHF human head arrays is still in the development
stages. Due to the substantially smaller size of the sample, dipoles must be
significantly shorter than λ/2. In addition, head arrays are commonly placed on the surface of rigid
helmets made sufficiently large to accommodate various heads. As a result,
dipoles are not well loaded and are often poorly decoupled (4,5), which
compromises the Tx-performance. Commonly adjacent elements of a Tx-array are
decoupled by circuits electrically connected to both elements (6-8). Placement
of such circuits between distantly located dipole antennas is difficult unless
they are bent to bring their ends closer to each other (5). The latter
restricts the choice of array geometries and may decrease the performance. Alternatively,
decoupling is done by placing additional decoupling antennas between adjacent
dipole elements (4). This method only works when decoupling components are made
sufficiently small (compared to the distance to the sample) not to compromise
the B1 profile of the
Tx-array itself (9), which is not the case of the reported design (4). In this work, we developed a
novel decoupling method of adjacent dipole elements of a transceiver (TxRx)
human head array at 9.4 T.Methods:
In comparison to surface loops, which are
coupled inductively (positive reactance), a pair of loaded dipole antennas is coupled capacitively (negative reactance).
Therefore, a mutual inductance has to be created to decouple dipole elements.
Fig.1A demonstrates how this inductive coupling is produced by folding the
dipoles and placing an RF shield near their folded portions. The presence of
the shield is equivalent to placing a mirror image of the dipole carrying an opposite
current at a distance double of the distance to the shield. Folded portions of
both dipoles (a real dipole and its mirror image) produce a capacitive bridge,
which depends on the distance to the shield and the folded length. Thus, by
adjusting the distance to the shield and folded length, we can compensate the
intrinsic capacitive coupling. In addition to folded straight dipoles (Fig.1A),
we also evaluated other types of dipoles shown in Figs.1B and 1C. Electromagnetic (EM) simulations of the coupling between dipoles (S12),
transmit B1+,
and local specific absorption rate (SAR) were performed using CST Studio Suite
2017 (CST, Darmstadt, Germany) and the time-domain solver based on the
finite-integration technique. Two voxel models were
used, i.e. a head/shoulder (HS) phantom (ε = 58.6, σ = 0.64
S/m), and the
virtual family multi-tissue model “Duke” (Fig.1C). All data were
acquired on a Siemens Magnetom 9.4 T human imaging system. After numerical optimization of decoupling and evaluation of array
performance and safety, we constructed and tested an 8-element single-row (1x8)
array consisting of 30-mm folded bent dipoles (30 mm – the length of the folded
portion).Results and Discussion:
As an example, Fig.2 shows the dependence of the S12 value on the length of the folded portion for
different heights of the folded bent antennas and the size of the phantom. As
seen from this figure, for each height of the dipole, a corresponding length
can be chosen, which provides the lowest S12
value. It is noteworthy
that creating capacitive coupling to the shield at one side of the dipole
element (Fig.1B) is sufficient to generate a proper mutual inductance. Table 1 shows results of numerical evaluation of the average
S12 value between adjacent
dipoles for different 8-element dipole arrays. The 30-mm folded bent dipoles
provide the best decoupling, which is about 7 dB better than that of unfolded dipoles. Figs.3A
and 3B show a photo of the dipole array and the schematic of a single dipole
element. Fig.3C shows S12
matrices measured using the new array for different heads. Average S12 value between all
adjacent elements measured -16.6 dB and -18.4 dB for the smaller and larger
head, respectively The constructed
array delivers good decoupling even for a small head. As an example, Fig.4 shows a set of
sagittal MP2RAGE images obtained using the dipole array.Conclusion:
We developed a novel method of decoupling of adjacent
dipole antennas, and used this technique while constructing a 9.4 T human head 8-elelment
TxRx dipole array coil. The array demonstrates good decoupling and full-brain
coverage.Acknowledgements
SG acknowledges a support by Government of
Russian Federation (Grant 08-08) and Ministry of Education and Science of the
Russian Federation (No. 3.2465.2017/4.6). Funding by the
European Union (ERC Starting Grant, SYNAPLAST MR, Grant Number: 679927) is
gratefully acknowledged by AN and RL.References
1) Raaijmakers AJE, Ipek O, Klomp DWJ
et al. Magn Reson Med 2011;66:1488-1497. 2)
Oezerdem C., Winter L., Graessl A. et al. Magn Reson Med 2016;75:2553–2565.
3) Raaijmakers AJE, Italiaander M, Voogt IJ et al. Magn Reson Med 2016;75:1366–1374. 4) Clément J, Gruetter R, and Ipek Ö. Magn Reson
Med 2019;81:1447–1458. 5) Connell IRO, Mennon RS IEEE
Trans Med Imag 2019;38: 2177-2187. 6) Avdievich NI.
Appl Magn Res 2011;41(2):483-506.
7) Jevtic J. Proc. ISMRM 2001, p. 17. 8) Shajan G,
Kozlov M, Hoffmann J et al. Magn Reson Med 2014;71:870–879. 9) Avdievich NI,
Pan JW, and Hetherington HP NMR in Biomed
2013;26(11):1547-1554.