Measurement of signal-to-noise ratios in MR images: Influence of multichannel coils, parallel imaging, and reconstruction filters

被引:799
作者
Dietrich, Olaf
Raya, Jose G.
Reeder, Scott B.
Reiser, Maximilian F.
Schoenberg, Stefan O.
机构
[1] Univ Munich, Dept Clin Radiol Grosshadern, D-81377 Munich, Germany
[2] Univ Wisconsin, Dept Radiol, Madison, WI 53706 USA
关键词
MR imaging; image analysis; signal-to-noise ratio; parallel imaging; postprocessing filters;
D O I
10.1002/jmri.20969
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Purpose: To evaluate the validity of different approaches to determine the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) in MRI experiments with multi-element surface coils, parallel imaging, and different reconstruction filters. Materials and Methods: Four different approaches of SNR calculation were compared in phantom measurements and in vivo based on: 1) the pixel-by-pixel standard deviation (SD) in multiple repeated acquisitions; 2) the signal statistics in a difference image; and 3) and 4) the statistics in two separate regions of a single image employing either the mean value or the SD of background noise. Different receiver coil systems (with one and eight channels), acquisitions with and without parallel imaging, and five different reconstruction filters were compared. Results: Averaged over all phantom measurements, the deviations from the reference value provided by the multiple-acquisitions method are 2.7% (SD 1.6%) for the difference method, 37.7% (25.9%) for the evaluation of the mean value of background noise, and 34.0% (38.1%) for the evaluation of the SD of background noise. Conclusion: The conventionally determined SNR based on separate signal and noise regions in a single image will in general not agree with the true SNR measured in images after the application of certain reconstruction filters, multichannel reconstruction, or parallel imaging.
引用
收藏
页码:375 / 385
页数:11
相关论文
共 40 条
[1]   COMPARING METHODS OF MEASUREMENT - WHY PLOTTING DIFFERENCE AGAINST STANDARD METHOD IS MISLEADING [J].
BLAND, JM ;
ALTMAN, DG .
LANCET, 1995, 346 (8982) :1085-1087
[2]   STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT [J].
BLAND, JM ;
ALTMAN, DG .
LANCET, 1986, 1 (8476) :307-310
[3]   Scalable multichannel MRI data acquisition system [J].
Bodurka, J ;
Ledden, PJ ;
van Gelderen, P ;
Chu, RX ;
de Zwart, JA ;
Morris, D ;
Duyn, JH .
MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICINE, 2004, 51 (01) :165-171
[4]  
Chen Q, 2004, RADIOLOGY, V231, P893, DOI [10.1148/radiol.2313021113, 10.1148/radio1:2313021113]
[5]   Signal to noise measurements in magnitude images from NMR phased arrays - (vol 38, pg 852, 1997) [J].
Constantinides, CD ;
Atalar, E ;
McVeigh, ER .
MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICINE, 2004, 52 (01) :219-219
[6]   Contrast-enhanced peripheral MR angiography using SENSE in multiple stations: Feasibility study [J].
de Vries, M ;
Nijenhuis, RJ ;
Hoogeveen, RM ;
de Haan, MW ;
van Engelshoven, JMA ;
Leiner, T .
JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2005, 21 (01) :37-45
[7]   A SIGNAL-TO-NOISE CALIBRATION PROCEDURE FOR NMR IMAGING-SYSTEMS [J].
EDELSTEIN, WA ;
BOTTOMLEY, PA ;
PFEIFER, LM .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1984, 11 (02) :180-185
[8]   Regional lung perfusion:: Assessment with partially parallel three-dimensional MR imaging [J].
Fink, C ;
Puderbach, M ;
Bock, M ;
Lodemann, KP ;
Zuna, I ;
Schmähl, A ;
Delorme, S ;
Kauczor, HU .
RADIOLOGY, 2004, 231 (01) :175-184
[9]   A comparison of two methods for measuring the signal to noise ratio on MR images [J].
Firbank, MJ ;
Coulthard, A ;
Harrison, RM ;
Williams, ED .
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 1999, 44 (12) :N261-N264
[10]   Generalized Autocalibrating Partially Parallel Acquisitions (GRAPPA) [J].
Griswold, MA ;
Jakob, PM ;
Heidemann, RM ;
Nittka, M ;
Jellus, V ;
Wang, JM ;
Kiefer, B ;
Haase, A .
MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICINE, 2002, 47 (06) :1202-1210