ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2025
An evaluation of the coax monopole antenna as a transmit array element for head imaging at 14 T.
Article in Magnetic resonance in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hippocampal architecture viewed through the eyes of methodological development.Anatomical science international · 2025Review
- An evaluation of the coax monopole antenna as a transmit array element for head imaging at 14 T.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIn comparison to dipole antennas, the coax monopole antenna (CMA) diminishes the possibility of cable-coil coupling. This greatly facilitates cable routing in spatially restricted environments, such as head coil arrays. With the outlook of a 14T MRI system being installed at the Donders Center in Nijmegen, the Netherlands, this study aims to optimize the CMA for an eight-channel head array at 14 T and compare its performance with an array of fractionated dipole antennas.
methodsBoth antenna designs were optimized for head imaging at 14 T using single-channel finite-difference time-domain (FDTD) simulations at 596 MHz. Eight-channel simulations were then used on a human model to evaluate
resultsThe optimal dimensions of the CMA were a length of 20 cm and a gap position of 4 cm. The fractionated dipole was optimal for a length of 25 cm. Evaluation of 100 000 random shims revealed that the CMA performs with lower SAR efficiency, although the SAR efficiencies are similar in CP mode. Measured S
conclusionThe coax monopole would be an excellent candidate for head coil arrays at 14T MRI. Although the CMA is expected to perform with lower SAR efficiency than the fractionated dipole, its single-ended design will facilitate elements placement and cable-routing, especially in a spatially restricted environment.
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.