Eva Alonso Ortiz, Daniel S. Papp, Robert Barry, Kyota Poëti, Alan C. Seifert, Kyle M. Gilbert, Nibardo Lopez Rios, Jan Paska, Falk Eippert, Nikolaus Weiskopf, Laura Beghini, Nadine N. Graedel, Robert Trampel, Martina F. Callaghan, Christoph Stefan Aigner, Patrick Freund, Maryam Seif, Aurélien Destruel, Virginie Callot, S. Johanna Vannesjo and Julien Cohen-Adad
Article (2025)
|
Open Access to the full text of this document Published Version Terms of Use: Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives Download (11MB) |
|
|
Open Access to the full text of this document Supplemental Material Terms of Use: Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives Download (1MB) |
Abstract
Purpose: The depth within the body, small diameter, long length, and varying tissue surrounding the spinal cord impose specific considerations when designing RF coils. The optimal coil configuration for 7 T cervical spinal cord MRI is unknown and currently there are very few coil options. The purpose of this work was (1) to establish a quality control protocol for evaluating 7 T cervical spinal cord coils, and (2) to use that protocol to evaluate the performance of four different coil designs. Methods: Three healthy volunteers and a custom anthropomorphic phantom (the traveling spines cohort) were scanned at seven 7 T imaging centers using a common protocol and each center's specific cervical spinal cord coil. Four different coil designs were tested (two in-house, one Rapid Biomedical, and one MRI.TOOLS design). Results: The Rapid Biomedical coil was found to have the highest B+1 efficiency, whereas one of the in-house designs (NeuroPoly Lab) had the highest SNR and the largest spinal cord coverage. The MRI.TOOLS coil had the most uniform B+1 profile along the cervical spinal cord; however, it was limited in its ability to provide the requested flip angles (especially for larger individuals). The latter was also the case for the second in-house coil (MSSM). Conclusion: The results of this study serve as a guide for the spinal cord MRI community in selecting the most suitable coil based on specific requirements and offer a standardized protocol for assessing future coils.
| Department: | Department of Electrical Engineering |
|---|---|
| Research Center: | NeuroPoly - Laboratoire de Recherche en Neuroimagerie |
| Funders: | NSERC, Canada First Research Excellence Fund (CFREF), Canada Research Chair in Quantitative Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI), Fonds de Recherche du Québec–Santé (FRQS), Québec Bio-imaging Network (QBIN) |
| PolyPublie URL: | https://publications.polymtl.ca/65913/ |
| Journal Title: | Magnetic Resonance in Medicine (vol. 94, no. 3) |
| Publisher: | Wiley |
| DOI: | 10.1002/mrm.30551 |
| Official URL: | https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.30551 |
| Date Deposited: | 03 Jun 2025 10:39 |
| Last Modified: | 26 Feb 2026 23:59 |
| Cite in APA 7: | Alonso Ortiz, E., Papp, D. S., Barry, R., Poëti, K., Seifert, A. C., Gilbert, K. M., Lopez Rios, N., Paska, J., Eippert, F., Weiskopf, N., Beghini, L., Graedel, N. N., Trampel, R., Callaghan, M. F., Stefan Aigner, C., Freund, P., Seif, M., Destruel, A., Callot, V., ... Cohen-Adad, J. (2025). Multi‐center benchmarking of cervical spinal cord RF coils for 7 T MRI: A traveling spines study. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, 94(3), 1339-1355. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.30551 |
|---|---|
Statistics
Total downloads
Downloads per month in the last year
Origin of downloads
Dimensions
