ArticleJournal of magnetic resonance (San Diego, Calif. : 1997)2023
Experimental demonstration of diffusion limitations on resolution and SNR in MR microscopy.
Article in Journal of magnetic resonance (San Diego, Calif. : 1997), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A practical prescription for magnetic resonance microscopy in a horizontal bore magnet.Npj imaging · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeMR microscopy is in principle capable of producing images at cellular resolution (<10 µm), but various factors limit the quality achieved in practice. A recognized limit on the signal to noise ratio and spatial resolution is the dephasing of transverse magnetization caused by diffusion of spins in strong gradients. Such effects may be reduced by using phase encoding instead of frequency encoding read-out gradients. However, experimental demonstration of the quantitative benefits of phase encoding are lacking, and the exact conditions in which it is preferred are not clearly established. We quantify the conditions where phase encoding outperforms a readout gradient with emphasis on the detrimental effects of diffusion on SNR and resolution.
methodsA 15.2 T Bruker MRI scanner, with 1 T/m gradients, and micro solenoid RF coils < 1 mm in diameter, were used to quantify diffusion effects on resolution and the signal to noise ratio of frequency and phase encoded acquisitions. Frequency and phase encoding's spatial resolution and SNR per square root time were calculated and measured for images at the diffusion limited resolution. The point spread function was calculated and measured for phase and frequency encoding using additional constant time phase gradients with voxels 3-15 µm in dimension.
resultsThe effect of diffusion during the readout gradient on SNR was experimentally demonstrated. The achieved resolutions of frequency and phase encoded acquisitions were measured via the point-spread-function and shown to be lower than the nominal resolution. SNR per square root time and actual resolution were calculated for a wide range of maximum gradient amplitudes, diffusion coefficients, and relaxation properties. The results provide a practical guide on how to choose between phase encoding and a conventional readout. Images of excised rat spinal cord at 10 µm × 10 µm in-plane resolution demonstrate phase encoding's benefits in the form of higher measured resolution and higher SNR than the same image acquired with a conventional readout.
conclusionWe provide guidelines to determine the extent to which phase encoding outperforms frequency encoding in SNR and resolution given a wide range of voxel sizes, sample, and hardware properties.
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.