ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2021
Estimation and removal of spurious echo artifacts in single-voxel MRS using sensitivity encoding.
Article in Magnetic resonance in medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Identifying Out-of-Voxel Echoes in Edited MRS With Phase Cycle Inversion.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2026Article
- SMART MRS: A Simulated MEGA-PRESS ARTifacts toolbox for GABA-edited MRS.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2025Article
- TE optimization for J-difference editing of 2-hydroxyglutarate at 3T.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2025Article
- Identifying out-of-voxel echoes in edited MRS with phase cycle inversion.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Impact of gradient scheme and non-linear shimming on out-of-voxel echo artifacts in edited MRS.NMR in biomedicine · 2023Article
- Identifying the source of spurious signals caused by BMagnetic resonance in medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeIn localized MRS, spurious echo artifacts commonly occur when unsuppressed signal outside the volume of interest is excited and refocused. In the spectral domain, these signals often overlap with metabolite resonances and hinder accurate quantification. Because the artifacts originate from regions separate from the target MRS voxel, this work proposes that sensitivity encoding based on receive-coil sensitivity profiles may be used to separate these signal contributions.
methodsNumerical simulations were performed to explore the effect of sensitivity-encoded separation for unknown artifact regions. An imaging-based approach was developed to identify regions that may contribute to spurious echo artifacts, and tested for sensitivity-based unfolding of signal on six data sets from three brain regions. Spectral data reconstructed using the proposed method ("ERASE") were compared with the standard coil combination.
resultsThe method was able to fully unfold artifact signals if regions were known a priori. Mismatch between estimated and true artifact regions reduced the efficiency of removal, yet metabolite signals were unaffected. Water suppression imaging was able to identify regions of unsuppressed signal, and ERASE (from up to eight regions) led to visible removal of artifacts relative to standard reconstruction. Fitting errors across major metabolites were also lower; for example, Cramér-Rao lower bounds of myo-inositol were 13.7% versus 17.5% for ERASE versus standard reconstruction, respectively.
conclusionThe ERASE reconstruction tool was demonstrated to reduce spurious echo artifacts in single-voxel MRS. This tool may be incorporated into standard workflows to improve spectral quality when hardware limitations or other factors result in out-of-voxel signal contamination.
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.