Jeremiah Hess1, Marianne Black2, Feliks Kogan2, and Brian Hargreaves1,2,3
1Department of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States, 2Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States, 3Department of Electrical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States
1Department of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States, 2Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States, 3Department of Electrical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States
We analyzed the SNR of flex coil-arrays versus a
rigid coil-array in phantom and in vivo to assess which coil had better
SNR. Preliminary results suggest that
flexible coil-arrays show comparable or increased SNR and generally more
uniform SNR over rigid coil-arrays.
Figure 3: a) SNR Images of cylindrical phantom from
3 different knee coils (Rigid, Medium Flex, Large Flex) for the central slice,
with masked images for the outer 1/3 and inner 2/3 of the phantom b) SNR
Images of 6-tube phantom for the same knee coils at the same slice, with masked
images showing the top and bottom tubes c) Plot of the average SNR with
standard deviation bars for cylindrical phantom images d) Plot of the
average SNR with standard deviation bars for 6-tube phantom images.
Figure 1: Flow chart of the pseudo-multiple replica method for calculating
SNR shown in Robson et al.3
