Ming Lu1,2, John C. Gore1,2, and Xinqiang Yan1,2
1Vanderbilt University Institute of Imaging Science, Nashville, TN, United States, 2Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, United States
Synopsis
At high fields, B1
inhomogeneity is one of the major challenges that limit imaging performance.
Parallel transmission with an array of coils is a recognized solution to B1
inhomogeneity. The self-decoupled coil is
attractive in Tx array design since it exhibits intrinsic inter-element
isolation that may ease the coil fabrication, and allows the dipole mode as
well as loop mode. In this work, we evaluated a series of self-decoupled
coils in terms of these parameters and aimed to provide guidance for the
practical building of a high-performance self-decoupled Tx array.
Purpose:
B1 inhomogeneity is one of the major
challenges at high fields. Parallel transmission with an array is a recognized solution to this problem. Parallel transmit
arrays, which allow the independent control of individual elements with
amplitude and phase modulations, can ameliorate and even correct
B1 inhomogeneities, and are widely employed in
ultra-high field MRI scanners [1-7]. Various Tx array designs have proposed, using loop, stripline, dipole, or mixed structures. In dense Tx arrays that have
strong inter-element crosstalk, various decoupling technologies have been used, such as overlapping, shielding,
passive resonator, and the recently-proposed self-decoupling [8-11]. The
self-decoupled coil is attractive in Tx array design since it exhibits
intrinsic inter-element isolation that may ease the coil fabrication, and
allows the dipole mode as well as loop mode [12, 13]. Self-decoupled arrays have been
investigated in previous works by evaluating the RF shimming and/or parallel
transmission capability in terms of transmit field uniformity and SAR. For Tx
arrays, however, the power efficiency (or transmit efficiency, B1+/√W), decoupling/matching
robustness, detune ability also play important roles in real coil fabrication. In
this work, we evaluated a series of self-decoupled coils in terms of these
parameters and aimed to provide guidance for the practical building of a massive-element self-decoupled Tx array.Methods:
We first investigated two side-by-side self-decoupled
loops with different coil sizes in EM simulation (Ansys HFSS and Designer, Canonsburg, PA, USA).
Figure 1A and 1B show simulation model with and without shield. Coils were mounted on a 29-cm-diameter cylindrical tube, with a 19-cm-daimeter
phantom placed 5cm below. The electromagnetic properties of the phantom were
set to the those of average brain tissues. The coil length (along
z-direction) is set with a fixed value of 10 cm, while the coil width (along
the circumference direction) varied across 5cm to 20 cm. Cmode
of each case was determined was following the method in Ref [11]. These
simulations were performed in two scenarios, without an RF shield and with a
35-cm-diameter RF shield. After the two-loop simulations, we also investigated
up to 24 self-decouple dipoles[13] + 24 self-decoupled loops with the optimal coil width of
15 cm. Details
about the coil width optimization will be described later in the Results
Section. This width is optimized by considering the decoupling ability, value
of Cmode, decoupling robustness, power efficiency, and the number of coils.Results and Discussions:
Figure 1C shows the circuit diagram of two
side-by-side self-decoupled coils. Cmode is for decoupling
performance, Ct (could also be inductor) is for tuning, and Cm is for matching. Figures 1D and 1E plots the coil decoupling (S21) versus
different Cmode, with coil width from 5cm to 20 cm. It is found that the best
isolation could only be ~10 dB when coil width <=7cm. Although the 9-cm-wide
coil can achieve -16 dB with the RF shielding, its optimal Cmode falls into a
quite small range, which will decrease the decoupling robustness and thus coil
robustness. To achieve decoupling ability better than -20 dB, the coil width is
suggested to be at least 13 cm (Figure 1G). Note that the decoupling
performance is also affected by the loading. The phantom-to-coil distance set
here represents the average coil-to-head distance in local Tx-only coils.
Figure 2A show B1+ and electric (E-) field of
a single self-decoupled with different coil widths. It is noted that smaller
coil has stronger B1+ near the surface area, while the large coils
have better penetration but lower local B1+. It is also not suggested to use the coil width up to 20 cm since it reduce the number of coils and the B1+ and E penetration are too
strong that may cause unwanted coupling with opposite elements. Figure 2B
analyzed the power loss in the phantom. In the ideal case, 100% power will be
dissipated in the phantom and contribute to the B1+ field. However, due to the
coil loss, radiation loss, and RF shielding loss, small coils have considerable
power dissipated outside the phantom and wasted. To achieve >80% power loss
in the phantom, the coil size is suggested to be >=15cm.
Based on the results in Figures 1 and 2, the
optimal coil width will be ~15cm. Figure 3 shows the detune performance of such
a 15-cm-wide coil. By employing one detune circuit across the Cmode, ~26dB detune
can be obtained. We also noted that detune ability to increase by 11dB by increasing number of detune circuits to 4. Figure 4 shows the simulation results of a Tx-only array with 24 self-decouple
loops (using the optimal coil width of 15cm) and 24 self-decouple dipoles [13]. It
is noted that the decoupling among all elements could be better than -15dB on a human head model. Figure 5 shows the SolidWorks drawing of the 48-element Tx-only coil with an close-fitting Rx-only coil inserted.Conclusion:
For the first time, we investigated how the coil size affect self-decoupled coils' performance in terms of decoupling ability, robustness, power efficiency, and etc. A 48-element self-decoupled head Tx array using the optimized size was simulated with the human model, and it is found this coil exhibits high inter-element isolation (<-15 dB) as well as the high transmit efficiency.Acknowledgements
No acknowledgement found.References
1. Zhu Y. Parallel
excitation with an array of transmit coils. Magn Reson Med. 2004;51(4):775-84.
Epub 2004/04/06. doi: 10.1002/mrm.20011. PubMed PMID: 15065251.
2. Adriany G, Van de Moortele PF, Ritter J,
Moeller S, Auerbach EJ, Akgun C, et al. A geometrically adjustable 16-channel
transmit/receive transmission line array for improved RF efficiency and parallel
imaging performance at 7 Tesla. Magn Reson Med. 2008;59(3):590-7. Epub
2008/01/26. doi: 10.1002/mrm.21488. PubMed PMID: 18219635.
3. Mao W, Smith MB, Collins CM. Exploring
the limits of RF shimming for high-field MRI of the human head. Magn Reson Med.
2006;56(4):918-22. Epub 2006/09/08. doi: 10.1002/mrm.21013. PubMed PMID:
16958070; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC4040521.
4.Orzada S, Bitz A, Gratz M, Johst S,
Shooshtary S, Voelker M, et al., editors. A 32-channel transmit system add-on
for 7 Tesla body imaging. Proc Intl Soc Mag Reson Med; 2017.
5. Raaijmakers AJ, Ipek O, Klomp DW, Possanzini C, Harvey PR, Lagendijk JJ, van Den Berg CA. Design of a radiative surface coil array element at 7 T: the single‐side adapted dipole antenna. Magnetic resonance in medicine. 2011 Nov;66(5):1488-97.
6. Alagappan V, Nistler J, Adalsteinsson E,
Setsompop K, Fontius U, Zelinski A, et al. Degenerate mode band-pass birdcage
coil for accelerated parallel excitation. Magn Reson Med. 2007;57(6):1148-58. Epub
2007/05/31. doi: 10.1002/mrm.21247. PubMed PMID: 17534905.
7. Metzger GJ, Snyder C, Akgun C, Vaughan T,
Ugurbil K, Van de Moortele PF. Local B1+ shimming for prostate imaging with
transceiver arrays at 7T based on subject-dependent transmit phase measurements.
Magn Reson Med. 2008;59(2):396-409. Epub 2008/01/30. doi: 10.1002/mrm.21476.
PubMed PMID: 18228604; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC4406352.
8. Avdievich NI. Transceiver-Phased Arrays for Human Brain Studies at 7 T. Appl Magn Reson. 2011;41(2-4):483-506. Epub 2011/12/01. doi: 10.1007/s00723-011-0280-y. PubMed PMID: 23516332; PubMed Central PMCID: PMCPMC3600590.
9. Gilbert KM, Belliveau JG, Curtis AT, Gati
JS, Klassen LM, Menon RS. A conformal transceive array for 7 T neuroimaging.
Magn Reson Med. 2012;67(5):1487-96. Epub 2011/12/23. doi: 10.1002/mrm.23124.
PubMed PMID: 22190335.
10. Li Y, Xie Z, Pang Y, Vigneron D, Zhang X. ICE decoupling technique for RF coil array designs. Medical physics. 2011 Jul;38(7):4086-93.
11. Yan X, Gore JC, Grissom WA. Self-decoupled radiofrequency coils for magnetic resonance imaging. Nature communications. 2018 Aug 28;9(1):1-2.
12. Yan X, Gore JC, Grissom WA. Multi-row and Loopole-type Self-decoupled RF Coils, ISMRM 2018, p4271.
13. Lu M, Gore JC, Yan X. Self-decoupled Folded Dipole Antenna, ISMRM 2020, p4054.