ArticleJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI2015
Improved quantitative (19) F MR molecular imaging with flip angle calibration and B1 -mapping compensation.
Article in Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Feasibility and optimization ofPhysics in medicine and biology · 2024Article
- Fluorine (Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2021Article
- Functional Imaging Using Fluorine (Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2021Article
- A systematic optimization ofNeuroImage · 2019Article
- Protein-Engineered Nanoscale Micelles for DynamicACS nano · 2019Article
- Optimization of steady-state free precession MRI for lung ventilation imaging withMagnetic resonance in medicine · 2019Article
- Improvement ofMagma (New York, N.Y.) · 2019Article
- Probe-Specific Procedure to Estimate Sensitivity and Detection Limits for 19F Magnetic Resonance Imaging.PloS one · 2016Article
- Recent Advances inEngineering (Beijing, China) · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo improve (19) F flip angle calibration and compensate for B1 inhomogeneities in quantitative (19) F MRI of sparse molecular epitopes with perfluorocarbon (PFC) nanoparticle (NP) emulsion contrast agents. MATERIALS AND
methodsFlip angle sweep experiments on PFC-NP point source phantoms with three custom-designed (19) F/(1) H dual-tuned coils revealed a difference in required power settings for (19) F and (1) H nuclei, which was used to calculate a calibration ratio specific for each coil. An image-based correction technique was developed using B1 -field mapping on (1) H to correct for (19) F and (1) H images in two phantom experiments.
resultsOptimized (19) F peak power differed significantly from that of (1) H power for each coil (P < 0.05). A ratio of (19) F/(1) H power settings yielded a coil-specific and spatially independent calibration value (surface: 1.48 ± 0.06; semicylindrical: 1.71 ± 0.02, single-turn-solenoid: 1.92 ± 0.03). (1) H-image-based B1 correction equalized the signal intensity of (19) F images for two identical (19) F PFC-NP samples placed in different parts of the field, which were offset significantly by ~66% (P < 0.001), before correction.
conclusion(19) F flip angle calibration and B1 -mapping compensations to the (19) F images employing the more abundant (1) H signal as a basis for correction resulted in a significant change in the quantification of sparse (19) F MR signals from targeted PFC NP emulsions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.