oru.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Comparison of different methods for combining phase-contrast images obtained with multiple coils
Department of Biomedical Engineering, Örebro University Hospital, Örebro, Sweden; Department of Biomedical Engineering, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden; Center for Medical Image Science and Visualization (CMIV), Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-8351-3367
Department of Biomedical Engineering, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden; Center for Medical Image Science and Visualization (CMIV), Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Center for Medical Image Science and Visualization (CMIV), Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden; Department of Medicine and Care, Division of Clinical Physiology, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
2005 (English)In: Magnetic Resonance Imaging, ISSN 0730-725X, E-ISSN 1873-5894, Vol. 23, no 7, p. 795-799Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The ability to determine coil sensitivities implies that a method optimized in terms of maximized signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) can be applied to the combination of multiple coil images. An optimization of SNR subsequently results in a minimized variance in quantitative velocity measurements using phase-contrast imaging. When coil sensitivities are unknown, the weighted mean method, utilizing the square of the signal magnitude as weights, is suitable for combination of multiple phase images. In this study, the optimized method using estimated coil sensitivities was compared to the weighted mean method both theoretically and experimentally. It is shown that absence of noise correlation between the different coil images implies no difference between the methods regarding the variance of the phase. In the practical situation, noise correlation does exist, implying an opportunity for further reduction of phase variance using the optimized method. In vitro and in vivo studies showed, however, no significant difference between the two methods studied.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
New York, USA: Elsevier, 2005. Vol. 23, no 7, p. 795-799
Keywords [en]
Phase-contrast imaging, reproducibility, SENSE, parallel MRI
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Medical Imaging
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-50373DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2005.06.002ISI: 000232943000004PubMedID: 16214610Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-26444543268OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-50373DiVA, id: diva2:930255
Available from: 2016-05-23 Created: 2016-05-23 Last updated: 2017-11-30Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records BETA

Thunberg, Per

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Thunberg, Per
In the same journal
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Medical and Health SciencesRadiology, Nuclear Medicine and Medical Imaging

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 388 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf