Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Determination of appropriate RF blocking impedance for MRI surface coils and arrays

  • Published:
Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Surface and phased array receiving coils in MRI typically require that RF excitation be accomplished using the body coil. This process requires that the receiving coils contain blocking circuitry to increase the overall circuit impedance during RF excitation and withstand the electromotive force induced by the applied electromagnetic field. The aim of this study was to determine the optimal impedance range required during RF excitation based on an assessment of image quality. The experimental results are fit by an exponential model and establish criteria that can be applied for general receiver coil design.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Schenck JF. Radiofrequency coils: types and characteristics. In: Bronskill MJ and Sprawls P, editors. The Physics of MRI; 1992 AAPM Summer School Proceedings, Woodbury, NY: AAPM, 1993: p 98–134.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Roemer PB, Edelstein WA, Hayes CE, Souza SP, Mueller OM. The NMR phased array. Magn Reson Med 1990;16:192–225.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Hayes CE, Hattes N, Roemer PB. Volume imaging with MR phased array. Magn Reson Med 1991;18:309–19.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Debbins JP, Felmlee JP, Riederer SJ. Phase alignment of multiple surface coil data for reduced bandwidth and reconstruction requirements Magn Reson Med 1997;38:1003–11.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Campeau NG, Johnson CD, Felmlee JP, et al. MR imaging of the abdomen with a phased-array multicoil: prospective clinical evaluation. Radiology 1995;195:769–76.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Hayes CE, Dietz MJ, King BF, Ehman RL. Pelvic imaging with phased array coils: quantitative assessment of signal-to-noise ratio improvement. JMRI 1992;2:321–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Yu KK, Hricak H, Subak LL, Zaloudek CJ, Powel CB. Preoperative staging of cervical carcinoma: phased array coil fast spinecho versus body coil spin-echo T2-weighted MR imaging. AJR 1998;171:707–11.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Schwartz LH, Panichek DM, Thomson E, et al. Comparison of phased-array and body coil for MR imaging of liver. Clin Radiol 1997;52:745–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Huch Boni RA, Meyenberger C, Pok Lundquist J, Trinkler F, Lutolf U, Krestin GP. Value of endorectal coil versus body coil MRI for diagnosis of recurrent pelvic malignancies. Abdominal Imaging 1996;21:345–52.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Breslau J, Dalley RW, Tsuruda JS, Hayes CE, Maravilla KR. Phased-array surface coil MR of the orbits and optic nerves. AJNR 1995;16:1247–51.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Fitzsimmons JR. The design of RF systems for patient safety. Ann NY Acad Sci 1992;649:313–21.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Bernstein F, Slavin G, Day RA, Macaluso F, Wolff SD. A phased array coil optimized for carotid artery imaging. Proceedings of ISMRM 7th Scientific Meeting: May, 1999: p. 163.

  13. Hayes CE, Mathis CM, Yuang C. Surface coil phased arrays for high resolution imaging of the carotid arteries. JMRI 1996;1:109–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Weiger M, Pruessmann KP, Gösele R. Leussier C, Röschmann P, Boesiger P. Specific coil design for SENSE: A six-element cardiac array. Proceedings of ISMRM 7th Scientific Meeting, May, 1999: p. 162.

  15. Hadley JR, Chapman BE, Roberts JA, et al. A three coil comparison for MR Angiography. Proceedings of ISMRM 7th Scientific Meeting, May, 1999: p. 164.

  16. Edelstein WA, Hardy CJ, Mueller OM. Electronic decoupling of surface-coil receivers for NMR imaging and spectroscopy. J Magn Res 1986;67:156–61.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Mellor PM, Checkley DR. Active coil isolation in NMR imaging and spectroscopy using PIN diods and tuned transmission line: a practical approach. MAGMA 1995;3:35–40.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Mayo Clinic and Foundation, MR Research Laboratory, 200 First St SW, 55905, Rochester, MN, USA

    Armen Kocharian, Phillip J. Rossman, Thomas C. Hulshizer, Joel P. Felmlee & Stephen J. Riederer

Authors
  1. Armen Kocharian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Phillip J. Rossman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Thomas C. Hulshizer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Joel P. Felmlee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Stephen J. Riederer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Armen Kocharian.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kocharian, A., Rossman, P.J., Hulshizer, T.C. et al. Determination of appropriate RF blocking impedance for MRI surface coils and arrays. MAGMA 10, 80–83 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02601842

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02601842

Keywords

Search

Navigation