Lucano Elena, Liberti Micaela, Mendoza Gonzalo G, Lloyd Tom, Iacono Maria Ida, Apollonio Francesca, Wedan Steve, Kainz Wolfgang, Angelone Leonardo M
Sapienza University of Rome, Italy.
Sapienza University of Rome.
IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2016 Aug;63(8):1591-1601. doi: 10.1109/TBME.2015.2506680. Epub 2015 Dec 17.
This study aims at a systematic assessment of five computational models of a birdcage coil for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with respect to accuracy and computational cost.
The models were implemented using the same geometrical model and numerical algorithm, but different driving methods (i.e., coil "defeaturing"). The defeatured models were labeled as: specific (S2), generic (G32, G16), and hybrid (H16, [Formula: see text]). The accuracy of the models was evaluated using the "symmetric mean absolute percentage error" ("SMAPE"), by comparison with measurements in terms of frequency response, as well as electric ( ||→E||) and magnetic ( || →B ||) field magnitude.
All the models computed the || →B || within 35% of the measurements, only the S2, G32, and H16 were able to accurately model the ||→E|| inside the phantom with a maximum SMAPE of 16%. Outside the phantom, only the S2 showed a SMAPE lower than 11%.
Results showed that assessing the accuracy of || →B || based only on comparison along the central longitudinal line of the coil can be misleading. Generic or hybrid coils - when properly modeling the currents along the rings/rungs - were sufficient to accurately reproduce the fields inside a phantom while a specific model was needed to accurately model ||→E|| in the space between coil and phantom.
Computational modeling of birdcage body coils is extensively used in the evaluation of radiofrequency-induced heating during MRI. Experimental validation of numerical models is needed to determine if a model is an accurate representation of a physical coil.
本研究旨在对用于磁共振成像(MRI)的鸟笼线圈的五种计算模型在准确性和计算成本方面进行系统评估。
这些模型使用相同的几何模型和数值算法,但采用不同的驱动方法(即线圈“去特征化”)来实现。去特征化模型被标记为:特定(S2)、通用(G32、G16)和混合(H16,[公式:见原文])。通过使用“对称平均绝对百分比误差”(“SMAPE”),并与频率响应、电场(||→E||)和磁场(||→B||)强度的测量值进行比较,来评估模型的准确性。
所有模型计算出的||→B||在测量值的35%以内,只有S2、G32和H16能够准确模拟体模内部的||→E||,最大SMAPE为16%。在体模外部,只有S2的SMAPE低于11%。
结果表明,仅基于沿线圈中心纵线的比较来评估||→B||的准确性可能会产生误导。通用或混合线圈——当对沿环/梯级的电流进行适当建模时——足以准确再现体模内部的场,而需要特定模型来准确模拟线圈与体模之间空间中的||→E||。
鸟笼式体线圈的计算建模在MRI期间射频诱导加热的评估中被广泛使用。需要对数值模型进行实验验证,以确定模型是否准确代表物理线圈。