Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23204945›Full record

ArticleConcepts in magnetic resonance. Part A, Bridging education and research2011

INTERCOMPARISON OF PERFORMANCE OF RF COIL GEOMETRIES FOR HIGH FIELD MOUSE CARDIAC MRI.

Christakis Constantinides, S Angeli, S Gkagkarellis, G Cofer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Concepts in magnetic resonance. Part A, Bridging education and research, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Christakis ConstantinidesDepartment of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, School of Engineering, University of Cyprus.
S Angeli
S Gkagkarellis
G Cofer

Funding

X-RAY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT WITH/WITHOUT LIVE ANIMALSP41RR005959 · NCRR · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI DZAU, VICTOR J · 1990 to 2011
$16.0M
Small Animal Imaging Resource ProgramU24CA092656 · NCI · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI JOHNSON, GEORGE ALLAN · 2007 to 2011
$2.2M
NCI NIH HHS U24 CA092656NCRR NIH HHS P41 RR005959
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multi-turn spiral surface coils are constructed in flat and cylindrical arrangements and used for high field (7.1 T) mouse cardiac MRI. Their electrical and imaging performances, based on experimental measurements, simulations, and MRI experiments in free space, and under phantom, and animal loading conditions, are compared with a commercially available birdcage coil. Results show that the four-turn cylindrical spiral coil exhibits improved relative SNR (rSNR) performance to the flat coil counterpart, and compares fairly well with a commercially available birdcage coil. Phantom experiments indicate a 50% improvement in the SNR for penetration depths ≤ 6.1 mm from the coil surface compared to the birdcage coil, and an increased penetration depth at the half-maximum field response of 8 mm in the 4-spiral cylindrical coil case, in contrast to 2.9 mm in the flat 4-turn spiral case. Quantitative comparison of the performance of the two spiral coil geometries in anterior, lateral, inferior, and septal regions of the murine heart yield maximum mean percentage rSNR increases of the order of 27-167% in vivo post-mortem (cylindrical compared to flat coil). The commercially available birdcage outperforms the cylindrical spiral coil in rSNR by a factor of 3-5 times. The comprehensive approach and methodology adopted to accurately design, simulate, implement, and test radiofrequency coils of any geometry and type, under any loading conditions, can be generalized for any application of high field mouse cardiac MRI.

Identifiers

PMID23204945
PMCPMC3508705

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.