Hitachi Site

Yearly Performance Evaluation

Hitachi Airis II
2-Dec-07

Table of Contents
Summary and Signature Page 2
Specific Comments 3
Site Information 4
Equipment Information 4
Table Position Accuracy 4
Magnetic Field Homogeneity 4
Slice Thickness Accuracy 4
Slice Crosstalk 5
Soft Copy Displays 6
RF Coil Performance Evaluation
Coil Inventory List 7
Body Flex Large 8
Body Flex Medium 9
Body Flex X-Large 10
C-Spine Quad 11
Head Coil 12
Knee 13
Latch/Joint (Oval) 14
Neck/Joint (Round) 15
Appendix A: Magnet Homgeneity Map 16
Appendix B: Slice Thickness / Profiles / RF Crosstalk 20
Appendix C: ACR Phantom Analysis 21
Appendix D: Explanation of RF Coil Test Format 28
 MRI Equipment Evaluation Summary & Signature Page
Site Name: Hitachi Site MRAP # 3235
Address: Survey Date: 12/2/07
City, State, Zip Report Date: 12/10/07
MRI Mfg: Hitachi Model: Airis II Field: 0.3

MRI Scientist: Moriel NessAiver, Ph.D. Signature:

Fail *
Pass

N/A
Equipment Evaluation Tests
1. Magnetic field homogeneity:
2. Slice position accuracy:
3. Table positioning reproducibility:
4. Slice thickness accuracy:
5. RF coils' performance:
a. Volume QD Coils
b. Phase Array Coils
c. Surface Coils
6. Inter-slice RF interference (Crosstalk):
7. Soft Copy Display
8. Film Calibration

Fail *
Pass

N/A
Evaluation of Site's Technologist QC Program
1. Set up and positioning accuracy: (daily)
2. Center frequency: (daily)
3. Transmitter attenuation or gain: (daily)
4. Geometric accuracy measurments: (daily)
5. Spatial resolution measurements: (daily)
6. Low contrast detectability: (daily)
7. Head Coil SNR (daily)
8. Body Coil SNR (weekly)
9. Fast Spin Echo (FSE/TSE) ghosting levels: (daily)
10. Film quality control: (weekly)
11. Visual checklist: (weekly)

*See comments page for description of any failures.

Hitachi Site Hitachi Airis II 2

 Specific Comments and Recommendations

1. The shim of the magnet is typical to poor for this type of magnet. Definitely worse than Florissant.

2. Positioning Laser is slightly out of calibration. Reproducibility is good.

3. All three body flex coils have SNR values 10-30% lower than Florissant. All other coils are comparable.

4. The display console is adequate, the film printer is very good.

5. The slice thickness look good but slice crosstalk starts when the slice gap drops below 40% of the slice thickness.

6.

7.

8.

9.

NOTE: Please be sure to read appendix D for an explanation of the format of this document.

Hitachi Site Hitachi Airis II 3

 MRI Equipment Performance Evaluation Data Form
Site Name: Hitachi Site

Contact Title Phone eMail

Chief Tech

Equipment Information
MRI Manufacturer: Hitachi Model: Airis II SN: C416 Software: V5.0R-3
Camera Manufacturer: Model: SN: Software:
PACS Manufacturer: Model: SN: Software:
ACR Phantom Number used: 6998

1. Table Positioning Reproducibility: Pass

Table motion out/in: IsoCenter Out/In Out/In
Measured Phantom Center -4.6 -4.5 -5.2
Comment:

2. Magnetic Field Homogeneity See appendix A for field plots. PASS

Last Year CF: N/A This Year CF: 12.65546 CF Change: NA

GRE TR/TE: 500/10 & 500/18 FOV: 300, BW 10 & 40 KHz
22 cm 10 mm skip 10 mm, Flip Angle 45°, 256x256, 2nex
Axial plane - Frequency L/R: 20-22 Comments: This shim is typical to poor.
Axial plane - Frequency A/P: 22-26
Sagittal plane - Frequency H/F: 14-27

3. Slice Thickness Accuracy

FOV: 250mm Matrix: 256x256 (Slice #1 from ACR Phantom) All values in mm
Sequence TR TE Flip NSA Calc Target % Error
SE (ACR) 500 20 90 1 5.48 5 9.6%
SE (Site T1) 500 18 90 1 5.49 5 9.8%
SE (20/80) 2000 20 90 1 5.59 5 11.8%
SE (20/80) 2000 80 90 2 5.02 5 0.4%
FSE(8) 4000 100 90 4 5.08 5 1.6%

Comments:

Hitachi Site Hitachi Airis II 4

 4. Slice Crosstalk (RF interference)
The following data were obtained using the ACR phantom slice thickness wedges to measure the slice profile of a typical
T1 weighted sequences when the slice gap varies from 200% down to 0% (contiguous) As the slices get closer
together it is expected that the edges of the slices will overlap causing a deterioration of the slice profile. The data shown
below clearly demonstrates this effect. Once the slice gap drops below 40% of the slice thickness, the measured slice
profile begins to drop. From this data it is clear that slice gaps should be at least 20% of the slice thickness and
ideally should be greater than 40%.
All of the slice profiles can be seen in appendix B.

Sequence FOV Slice

TR TE Matrix NSA Thickness # of slices
Type (cm2) Measured
Site T1 SE 400 18 25 256x256 2 5 11 6

Skip ACR T1
0.0 4.49
0.5 4.81
1.0 5.08
1.5 5.2
2.0 5.32
2.5 5.44
5.0 5.46
10.0 5.49

T1 Weighted Slice Thicknesses

5.5

5.25
Thickness (mm)

4.75

ACR T1
4.5

4.25
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0
Slice Gap (mm)

Hitachi Site Hitachi Airis II 5

 5. Soft & Hard Copy Displays

Luminance Meter Make/Model: Tektronix J16 Digital Photometer Cal Expires: 4/6/07
Monitor Description: LCD display
Luminance Measured: Ft. lamberts
Measured Data Uniformity SMPTE

Center of Top Bottom Bottom

Which Top Left Percent
Monitor
Image Right Left Right MAX MIN OK?
Display Corner Corner Corner Corner
Delta

Console 32.4 29.8 27.8 30.8 29.3 32.4 27.8 15% Y

% delta =200% x (max-min)/(max+center) (>30% is action limit)

Minimum Brightness must be > 26.24 Ft. Lamberts

The display is adequate, the film printer is very good.

Ft- Film
Density
Lambert Density LCD & Film Response Curve
0 0.31 -3.15 100.0 0
5 0.45 -2.7

10 0.72 -2.45 -0.5

20 1.90 -2
Log Ft-Lambert

30 3.31 -1.65 10.0 -1

40 5.58 -1.38

50 8.44 -1.14
-1.5
60 11.90 -0.99

70 15.5 -0.83
1.0 -2
Ideal Curve
80 20.9 -0.66
LCD
90 27.7 -0.5
Film -2.5
95 30.7 -0.42

100 32.1 -0.35

0.1 -3
0 20 40 60 80 100
% Density

Hitachi Site Hitachi Airis II 6

 Coil and Other Hardware Inventory List
Site Name Hitachi Site
ACR Magnet # Nickname Airis II

Active Coil Description Manufacturer Model Rev. Mfg. Date SN Channels

Body Flex Large Hitachi MR-QFC-53AN Aug, 2003 KR19457304 1

Body Flex Medium Hitachi MR-QFC-52AN A Aug, 2003 KR19456305 1

Body Flex X-Large Hitachi MR-QFC-55 Aug, 2003 KR10036301 1

C-Spine Quad Hitachi MR-QCS-52 1 Mar, 2004 527 1

CTL Coil USA Instruments MR-CTL-51 A Jun, 2002 435 4

Head Hitachi MR-QHC-52 Apr, 2003 KR10031306 1

Knee Hitachi MR-QKC-51 Sep, 2003 KR100 1

Latch/Joint Hitachi MR-JCL-53 Feb, 2003 KR10039305 1

Neck/Joint Hitachi MR-JC-53 Oct, 2003 KR1032303 1

Shoulder Hitachi MR-PSC-51 Mar, 2004 527 1

Wrist Hitachi MR-QWC-51 1 Sep, 2004 KR1044407 1

7
 RF Coil Performance Evaluation 12/2/2007
Test Date:
Coil: Body Flex Large Model: MRQFC 53AN
Mfg.: Hitachi Revision:
Mfg. Date: 3/3/1998 Coil ID: 1366 SN: KR18951804
Phantom: Hitachi Bottle #4 # of Channels 1

Sequence TR TE Plane FOV Nx Ny BW NSA Thickness Gap

SE 300 20 T 42 256 256 24 1 5 -

Coil Mode: Body Flex L

Analysis of Test Image

Measured Data Calculated Results
Back Noise Noise Mean Normal- Max Uni-
Label Mean Max Min ground SD Type SNR ized SNR formity
N 12,684 14,783 11,650 36.1 306.01 NEMA 29.3 11.1 34.2 88.1%
A 12,659 14,777 11,575 529.6 281.67 Air 29.5 11.2 34.4 87.8%

The SNR of this coil is 12.5% lower than Florissant’s

Test Images

Hitachi Site Airis II 8

 RF Coil Performance Evaluation 12/2/2007
Test Date:
Coil: Body Flex Medium Model: MRQFC 52AN
Mfg.: Hitachi Revision:
Mfg. Date: 6/14/2001 Coil ID: 1365 SN: KR15159102
Phantom: Hitachi Bottle #4 # of Channels 1

Sequence TR TE Plane FOV Nx Ny BW NSA Thickness Gap

SE 300 20 T 42 256 256 24 1 5 -

Coil Mode: Body Flex M

Analysis of Test Image

Measured Data Calculated Results
Back Noise Noise Mean Normal- Max Uni-
Label Mean Max Min ground SD Type SNR ized SNR formity
N 13,552 15,717 12,608 -42.4 265.50 NEMA 36.1 13.7 41.9 89.0%
A 13,595 15,769 12,617 456.9 241.75 Air 36.9 14.0 42.7 88.9%

The SNR of this coil is 9% lower than Florissant’s

Test Images

Hitachi Site Airis II 9

 RF Coil Performance Evaluation 12/2/2007
Test Date:
Coil: Body Flex X-Large Model: MR-QFC-55
Mfg.: Hitachi Revision:
Mfg. Date: Coil ID: 1368 SN:
Phantom: Hitachi Bottle #4 # of Channels 1

Sequence TR TE Plane FOV Nx Ny BW NSA Thickness Gap

SE 300 20 T 42 256 256 24 1 5 -

Coil Mode: Body Flex XL

Analysis of Test Image

Measured Data Calculated Results
Back Noise Noise Mean Normal- Max Uni-
Label Mean Max Min ground SD Type SNR ized SNR formity
N 11,165 14,799 8,044 -32.0 461.00 NEMA 17.1 6.5 22.7 70.4%
A 11,197 14,758 8,015 802.0 428.00 Air 17.1 6.5 22.6 70.4%

Test Images

Hitachi Site Airis II 10

 RF Coil Performance Evaluation 12/2/2007
Test Date:
Coil: C-Spine Quad Model: 52AN
Mfg.: Hitachi Revision:
Mfg. Date: 6/14/2001 Coil ID: 1364 SN: 938
Phantom: Hitachi Bottle #3 # of Channels 1

Sequence TR TE Plane FOV Nx Ny BW NSA Thickness Gap

SE 300 20 T 36 256 256 24 1 5 -

Coil Mode: Quad Cspine

Analysis of Test Image

Measured Data Calculated Results
Back Noise Noise Mean Normal- Max Uni-
Label Mean Max Min ground SD Type SNR ized SNR formity
N 13,786 20,896 8,441 7.3 122.63 NEMA 79.5 41.1 120.5 57.5%
A 13,778 20,940 8,425 195.0 104.30 Air 86.6 44.7 131.6 57.4%

Test Images

Hitachi Site Airis II 11

 RF Coil Performance Evaluation 12/2/2007
Test Date:
Coil: Head Coil Model:
Mfg.: Hitachi Revision:
Mfg. Date: Coil ID: 1363 SN:
Phantom: ACR Phantom # of Channels 1

Sequence TR TE Plane FOV Nx Ny BW NSA Thickness Gap

SE 300 20 T 40 256 256 24 1 5 -

Coil Mode: Head

Analysis of Test Image

Measured Data Calculated Results
Back Noise Noise Mean Normal- Max Uni-
Label Mean Max Min ground SD Type SNR ized SNR formity
N 16,375 17,727 15,289 22.7 158.81 NEMA 72.9 30.5 78.9 92.6%
A 16,352 17,799 15,266 265.0 140.76 Air 76.1 31.9 82.9 92.3%

Test Images

Hitachi Site Airis II 12

 RF Coil Performance Evaluation 12/2/2007
Test Date:
Coil: Knee Model: MR-QKE 51
Mfg.: Hitachi Revision:
Mfg. Date: 5/28/2001 Coil ID: 1367 SN: KR12403962
Phantom: Hitachi Bottle #3 # of Channels 1

Sequence TR TE Plane FOV Nx Ny BW NSA Thickness Gap

SE 300 20 T 36 256 256 24 1 5 -

Coil Mode: Knee

Analysis of Test Image

Measured Data Calculated Results
Back Noise Noise Mean Normal- Max Uni-
Label Mean Max Min ground SD Type SNR ized SNR formity
N 15,489 18,006 12,955 12.7 122.97 NEMA 89.1 46.0 103.6 83.7%
A 15,477 18,057 12,924 202.6 107.89 Air 94.0 48.6 109.7 83.4%

Test Images

Hitachi Site Airis II 13

 RF Coil Performance Evaluation 12/2/2007
Test Date:
Coil: Latch/Joint(Oval) Model: MR-JCL 52
Mfg.: Hitachi Revision:
Mfg. Date: 6/26/2001 Coil ID: 1370 SN: KR15176102
Phantom: Hitachi Bottle #3 # of Channels 1

Sequence TR TE Plane FOV Nx Ny BW NSA Thickness Gap

SE 300 20 T 36 256 256 24 1 5 -

Coil Mode: Latch/Joint

Analysis of Test Image

Measured Data Calculated Results
Back Noise Noise Mean Normal- Max Uni-
Label Mean Max Min ground SD Type SNR ized SNR formity
N 15,347 18,828 12,677 16.3 133.57 NEMA 81.3 42.0 99.7 80.5%
A 15,330 18,830 12,674 228.5 122.32 Air 82.1 42.4 100.9 80.5%

Test Images

Hitachi Site Airis II 14

 RF Coil Performance Evaluation 12/2/2007
Test Date:
Coil: Neck/Joint (round) Model: MR-JC 53
Mfg.: Hitachi Revision:
Mfg. Date: 6-21-2001 Coil ID: 1369 SN: KR15157101
Phantom: Hitachi Bottle #3 # of Channels 1

Sequence TR TE Plane FOV Nx Ny BW NSA Thickness Gap

SE 300 20 T 36 256 256 24 1 5 -

Coil Mode: Neck/Joint

Analysis of Test Image

Measured Data Calculated Results
Back Noise Noise Mean Normal- Max Uni-
Label Mean Max Min ground SD Type SNR ized SNR formity
N 15,760 17,845 12,981 8.6 137.53 NEMA 81.0 41.9 91.8 84.2%
A 15,751 17,840 12,959 235.3 125.66 Air 82.1 42.5 93.0 84.2%

Test Images

Hitachi Site Airis II 15

 Appendix A:
Estimating Homogeneity by Measuring Geometric Distortion

The preferred method of measuring magnet homogeneity is to use gradient echo imaging sequence to obtain phase images also
known as phase maps. Ideally, if a magnet is absolutely perfectly uniform then all of the protons will be perfectly in-phase with
each other at the echo time. Any variations in the magnetic field will cause variations in the resonance frequencies across the field
of view (FOV) which, in turn, will cause variations in the signal phase that are directly proportional to the variations in the magnet
homogeneity. In order to obtain these phase map images, it is necessary to be able to reconstruct phase images instead of the usual
magnitude images. Unfortunately, Hitachi does not provide that option on their scanners except to the service engineers and I was
unable to obtain the assistance of the site engineer to make this measurement.

Fortunately, there is an alternative, although not a good one. When acquiring images, one encodes the spatial location of signal
by applying a readout gradient of known strength, for example 1000 Hz/cm. When the images are reconstructed, the signal is ana-
lyzed for the strength of the signal at different frequencies and they are then mapped to the different pixels in the image. The
assumption is that the ONLY thing that affects the signal frequency is the imaging or readout gradient. If there are inhomogeneities
in the magnetic field, this will cause spatially varying frequencies unrelated to the readout gradient which will, in turn, cause errors
in mapping the signal to different pixels which will be visible as geometric distortion. By imaging a phantom using two different
receiver bandwidths (BW) is is possible to estimate the variations in the magnetic field at the edges of the phantom by measuring
the differences in the distortion of the two sets of images.

The following pages depict the results of imaging the largest Hitachi bottle phantom (#4) which has an approximate diameter
just over 21 cm, using a 39 Hz/pixel and a 156 Hz/pixel gradient. This was done in the axial plane with the readout gradient in both
the L/R and A/P directions and in the sagittal plane with H/F readout gradient. Nine slices were acquired with each set using a 10
mm thick slice with a 10 mm gap. The phantom edges were detected and a set of radial lines were drawn with radial lengths mea-
sured as a function of rotational angle. The difference in radial diameters for the two sets of gradients were calculated and then con-
verted to differences in frequencies (in Hz.) These values were then divided by the magnets operating frequency, 12.7MHz to pro-
vide a value in Parts per Million (PPM). Below is a graph of the measured PPM for the three different gradient directions. Although
I have very little experience with these type of results on a low field magnet, I believe these data are somewhere between typical and
poor. The values in the graph below are about 50-75% higher than Florissant

Axial: L/R frequency

Hitachi Site Airis II - Magnet Homogeneity
Axial: A/P frequency
Sag: H/F frequency 21 cm FOV - December 2, 2007
30

25

20
PPM

15

10

0
-80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80
Slice distance from Isocenter in mm

16
 Appendix A:
Estimating Homogeneity by Measuring Geometric Distortion
Axial Plane - Frequency Direction: Anterior to Posterior
Measured December 2, 2007

The green lines are radii acquired with 156 Hz/pixel (least distortion)
The black lines are radii acquired with 39 Hz/pixel (most distortion)
The red plots are the differences in the radii.
The images are the subtraction of the images using the two BW values
110 110 110

108 108 108

106 106 106

104 104 104

102 102 102

0 45 90 135 180 225 270 315 360 0 45 90 135 180 225 270 315 360 0 45 90 135 180 225 270 315 360

Ave Diameter: 211.6 mm Homogeneity:23.3 PPM Ave Diameter: 211.5 mm Homogeneity:25.5 PPM Ave Diameter: 210.7 mm Homogeneity:26.0 PPM

Superior 80mm Superior 40mm Isocenter

110 110

108 108

106 106

104 104

102 102

100 100
0 45 90 135 180 225 270 315 360 0 45 90 135 180 225 270 315 360

Ave Diameter: 210.6 mm Homogeneity:23.7 PPM Ave Diameter: 210.5 mm Homogeneity:22.3 PPM

Inferior 40mm Inferior 80mm

17
 Appendix A:
Estimating Homogeneity by Measuring Geometric Distortion
Axial Plane - Frequency Direction: Left to Right
Measured December 2, 2007

The green lines are radii acquired with 156 Hz/pixel (least distortion)
The black lines are radii acquired with 39 Hz/pixel (most distortion)
The red plots are the differences in the radii.
The images are the subtraction of the images using the two BW values
112 112 110

110 110
108
108
108
106 106
106
104
104
104 102
102 100 102
0 45 90 135 180 225 270 315 360 0 45 90 135 180 225 270 315 360 0 45 90 135 180 225 270 315 360

Ave Diameter: 214.2 mm Homogeneity:22.1 PPM Ave Diameter: 214.1 mm Homogeneity:20.9 PPM Ave Diameter: 213.2 mm Homogeneity:20.7 PPM

Superior 60mm Superior 30mm Isocenter

110 112
110
108
108

106 106

104
104
102
102 100
0 45 90 135 180 225 270 315 360 0 45 90 135 180 225 270 315 360

Ave Diameter: 213.0 mm Homogeneity:20.6 PPM Ave Diameter: 212.7 mm Homogeneity:21.0 PPM

Inferior 30mm Inferior 60mm

18
 Appendix A:
Estimating Homogeneity by Measuring Geometric Distortion
Sagittal Plane - Frequency Direction: Head to Foot
Measured December 2, 2007

The green lines are radii acquired with 156 Hz/pixel (least distortion)
The black lines are radii acquired with 39 Hz/pixel (most distortion)
The red plots are the differences in the radii.
The images are the subtraction of the images using the two BW values
114 112 112

112
110 110
110
108 108
108
106 106
106

104 104 104

0 45 90 135 180 225 270 315 360 0 45 90 135 180 225 270 315 360 0 45 90 135 180 225 270 315 360

Ave Diameter: 212.3 mm Homogeneity:13.9 PPM Ave Diameter: 212.6 mm Homogeneity:14.8 PPM Ave Diameter: 213.3 mm Homogeneity:16.6 PPM

Right 60mm Right 30mm Isocenter

114 114
112 112

110 110

108 108

106 106

104 104
102 102
0 45 90 135 180 225 270 315 360 0 45 90 135 180 225 270 315 360

Ave Diameter: 214.2 mm Homogeneity:21.7 PPM Ave Diameter: 214.0 mm Homogeneity:27.6 PPM

Left 30mm Left 60mm

19
Appendix B: RF Slice Profiles and Crosstalk

Spin Echo : ACR T1

TR/TE = 400/18
BW = 20 KHz
nex = 2
Scan time: 3:25

100
SE Sk 10.0 100
SE Sk 5 100
SE Sk 2.5
Upper=54.07 Lower=55.81 Upper=54.75 Lower=54.45 Upper=53.32 Lower=55.48
80 80 80

60 60 60

40 40 40

20 20 20

0 Slice Thickness=5.49 0 Slice Thickness=5.46 0 Slice Thickness=5.44

0 50 100 150 0 50 100 150 0 50 100 150

100
SE Sk 2.0 100
SE Sk 1.5 100
SE Sk 1.0
Upper=52.81 Lower=53.51 Upper=51.35 Lower=52.61 Upper=50.35 Lower=51.21
80 80 80

60 60 60

40 40 40

20 20 20

0 Slice Thickness=5.32 0 Slice Thickness=5.20 0 Slice Thickness=5.08

0 50 100 150 0 50 100 150 0 50 100 150

100
SE Sk 0.5 100
SE Sk 0.0
Upper=48.10 Lower=48.00 Upper=44.36 Lower=45.35
80 80

60 60

40 40

20 20

0 Slice Thickness=4.81 0 Slice Thickness=4.49

0 50 100 150 0 50 100 150

Slice thickness as a function of slice gap

5.50
Slice Thickness

5.25

5.00

4.75

4.50
0 2 4 6 8 10
Slice Gap
20
Hitachi Site Airis II
Coil Used: Head Coil Test Date: 12/2/2007

Sagittal Locator
1 Length of phantom, end to end (mn 148± 2) 145.8 = calculated field
(SE 500/20) (SE 2000/20) (SE 2000/80) (Site T1) (Site T2)
Slice Location #1 ACR T1 ACR PD ACR T2 Site T1 Site T2
2 Resolution 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0
3 (1.10, 1.00, 0.90 mm) 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.0 1.0
4 Slice Thickness Top 56.3 57.2 49.9 55.3 50.1
5 (fwhm in mm) Bottom 53.4 54.6 50.5 54.5 51.5
6 Calculated value 5.0±0.7 5.48 5.59 5.02 5.49 5.08
7 Wedge (mm) =+ = - -1.1 -3.4 -3.7 -1.2 -1.7
8 191.2 190.6 191.8 190.6 190.2
Diameter (mm) (190±2)
9 189.1 189.2 189.0 189.1 189.3
Slice Location #5
10 191.5 190.7 192.7 190.6 190.2
11 Diameter (mm) (190±2) 189.0 189.1 188.8 189.0 189.0
12 189.2 189.1 190.2 189.0 188.9
13 188.1 187.8 188.2 189.0 187.5
Slice Location #7
14 Signal Big ROI 11167 11929 6840 22766 21642
15 (mean only) High 12398 13051 7829 24804 24227
16 Low 10112 10826 6026 20868 17978
17 Uniformity (>87.5%) 89.8% 90.7% 87.0% 91.4% 85.2%
18 Background Noise Top 296.2 ± 161.8 338.2 ± 179.13 217.7 ± 117.1 479.2 ± 258.5 591.1 ± 292.78
19 Bottom 312.6 ± 165.6 340.4 ± 181.35 231.9 ± 125.38 487.6 ± 264.88 591.1 ± 308.19
20 (mean ±std dev) Left 314.2 ± 167.7 347 ± 183.85 264.8 ± 135.98 527.4 ± 287.47 789.9 ± 424.56
21 Right 313.5 ± 166.4 404.1 ± 203.54 271.4 ± 135.52 528.2 ± 273.90 912.1 ± 429.41
22 Ghosting Ratio (<2.5%) 0.1% 0.3% 0.6% 0.2% 1.2%
23 SNR (no spec) 68 66 56 87 72
Low Con Detectability
24 Slice Location #8 1.4% 0 0 0 1 0
25 Slice Location #9 2.5% 2 0 0 2 1
26 Slice Location #10 3.6% 5 2 1 7 3
27 Slice Location #11 5.1% 6 7 8 8 8
28 Total # of Spokes (>=9) 13 9 9 18 12
Slice Location #11
29 Wedge (mm) =+ = - -1.5 -3.2 -3.2 -1.3 -1.9
30 Slice Position Error -0.4 0.1 0.4 -0.1 -0.2

21
Hitachi Site Airis II
Sequence parameters Test Date: 12/2/2007

Coil Used: Head Coil Test ID 228

Study Pulse Phase Number Thick- Band Scan

Descrip Sequence TR TE FOV Sample of ness Slice NSA Freq Phase Width Time
tion (ETL) (ms) (ms) (cm) Ratio Slices (mm) Gap (Nex) Matrix Matrix (kHz) (min:sec)

ACR T1 SE 500 20 25 1 11 5 5 1 256 256 16 2:09

Dual
ACR PD 2000 20 25 1 11 5 5 1 256 256 18 8:32
Echo SE

Dual
ACR T2 2000 80 25 1 11 5 5 1 256 256 8 8:32
Echo SE

Site T1 SE 500 18 25 1 11 5 5 2 256 256 20 3:44

Site T2 FSE(8) 4000 100 25 1 11 5 5 4 256 256 22.7 7:28

Magnet ID: 180 Coil ID: 1363 TestID: 228

22
Appendix C: ACR Phantom Analysis ACR T1
Sagital Length High Contrast Resolution Slice Thickness Slice Position - Inferior
1.5∑104 2000 3∑104

1500
1.0∑104 2∑104

1000

5.0∑103 1∑104
500

145.8
0
0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 0 50 100 150 200 0 10 20 30 40 50

Upper=56.34
Lower=53.42
Slice Thickness=5.48

Diff.= -1.13

Axial Diameters - #1 Axial Diameters - #5 Uniformity & Ghosting - #7 Slice Position - Superior
196 4∑104
196
Mean:11167
194 194

3∑104

192 192

190 190 2∑104

188 188

1∑104

186 186

184
184 0
0 45 90 135 180 0 45 90 135 180 Max:12398 Min:10112 PIU: 89.8% 0 10 20 30 40 50

190.0 191.2 190.4 190.2 191.5 190.7

187.7 188.6 188.1 189.2 Mean 296.2

S.D. 161.77

189.1 189.0 Mean 314.2 Mean 313.5

S.D. 167.67 S.D. 166.42

Mean 312.6
S.D. 165.61 Diff.= -1.46

12/02/07 TR: 500 TE: 20.0

Low Contrast - #8 Low Contrast - #9 Low Contrast - #10 Low Contrast - #11

23
Appendix C: ACR Phantom Analysis ACR PD
High Contrast Resolution Slice Thickness Slice Position - Inferior
2500 4∑104

2000
3∑104

1500

2∑104

1000

1∑104
500

0 0
0 50 100 150 200 0 10 20 30 40 50

Upper=57.17
Lower=54.62
Slice Thickness=5.59

Diff.= -3.35

Axial Diameters - #1 Axial Diameters - #5 Uniformity & Ghosting - #7 Slice Position - Superior
196 4∑104
196
Mean:11929
194 194

3∑104

192 192

190 190 2∑104

188 188

1∑104

186 186

184
184 0
0 45 90 135 180 0 45 90 135 180 Max:13051 Min:10826 PIU: 90.7% 0 10 20 30 40 50

189.5 190.6 190.1 189.6 190.7 190.2

187.4 188.7 187.8 189.1 Mean 338.2

S.D. 179.13

189.2 189.1 Mean 347.0 Mean 404.1

S.D. 183.85 S.D. 203.54

Mean 340.4
S.D. 181.35 Diff.= -3.21

12/02/07 TR:2000 TE: 20.0

Low Contrast - #8 Low Contrast - #9 Low Contrast - #10 Low Contrast - #11

24
Appendix C: ACR Phantom Analysis ACR T2
High Contrast Resolution Slice Thickness Slice Position - Inferior
1500 2.0∑104

1.5∑104
1000

1.0∑104

500
5.0∑103

0 0
0 50 100 150 200 0 10 20 30 40 50

Upper=49.91
Lower=50.46
Slice Thickness=5.02

Diff.= -3.65

Axial Diameters - #1 Axial Diameters - #5 Uniformity & Ghosting - #7 Slice Position - Superior
196 2.5∑104
196
Mean:6840
194 194
2.0∑104

192 192

1.5∑104

190 190

1.0∑104
188 188

186 5.0∑103
186

184
184 0
0 45 90 135 180 0 45 90 135 180 Max:7829 Min:6026 PIU: 87.0% 0 10 20 30 40 50

190.7 191.8 191.7 191.4 192.7 192.0

187.6 189.8 188.2 190.2 Mean 217.7

S.D. 117.10

189.0 188.8 Mean 264.8 Mean 271.4

S.D. 135.98 S.D. 135.52

Mean 231.9
S.D. 125.38 Diff.= -3.23

12/02/07 TR:2000 TE: 80.0

Low Contrast - #8 Low Contrast - #9 Low Contrast - #10 Low Contrast - #11

25
Appendix C: ACR Phantom Analysis Site T1
High Contrast Resolution Slice Thickness Slice Position - Inferior
5000 6∑104

4000

4∑104
3000

2000
2∑104

1000

0 0
0 50 100 150 200 0 10 20 30 40 50

Upper=55.26
Lower=54.48
Slice Thickness=5.49

Diff.= -1.20

Axial Diameters - #1 Axial Diameters - #5 Uniformity & Ghosting - #7 Slice Position - Superior
196 8∑104
196
Mean:22766
194 194

6∑104

192 192

190 190 4∑104

188 188

2∑104

186 186

184
184 0
0 45 90 135 180 0 45 90 135 180 Max:24804 Min:20868 PIU: 91.4% 0 10 20 30 40 50

189.4 190.6 189.9 189.6 190.6 189.9

187.4 188.7 187.8 189.0 Mean 479.2

S.D. 258.50

189.1 189.0 Mean 527.4 Mean 528.2

S.D. 287.47 S.D. 273.90

Mean 487.6
S.D. 264.88 Diff.= -1.26

12/02/07 TR: 500 TE: 18.0

Low Contrast - #8 Low Contrast - #9 Low Contrast - #10 Low Contrast - #11

26
Appendix C: ACR Phantom Analysis Site T2
High Contrast Resolution Slice Thickness Slice Position - Inferior
5000 6∑104

5∑104
4000

4∑104
3000

3∑104

2000
2∑104

1000
1∑104

0 0
0 50 100 150 200 0 10 20 30 40 50

Upper=50.11
Lower=51.49
Slice Thickness=5.08

Diff.= -1.73

Axial Diameters - #1 Axial Diameters - #5 Uniformity & Ghosting - #7 Slice Position - Superior
196 8∑104
196
Mean:21642
194 194

6∑104

192 192

190 190 4∑104

188 188

2∑104

186 186

184
184 0
0 45 90 135 180 0 45 90 135 180 Max:24227 Min:17978 PIU: 85.2% 0 10 20 30 40 50

188.8 190.2 189.5 189.1 190.2 189.5

187.1 188.4 187.5 188.9 Mean 565.2

S.D. 292.78

189.3 189.0 Mean 789.9 Mean 912.1

S.D. 424.56 S.D. 429.41

Mean 591.1
S.D. 308.19 Diff.= -1.90

12/02/07 TR:4000 TE: 100.0

Low Contrast - #8 Low Contrast - #9 Low Contrast - #10 Low Contrast - #11

27
 Appendix D:
Explanation of RF Coil Testing Report

Introduction
The primary goal of RF coil testing is to establish some sort of base line for tracking coil performance over
time. The most common measure is the Signal to Noise Ratio or SNR. In addition, we can look at overall
signal uniformity, ghosting level (or better - lack of ghosting) and in the case of phased array coils we look
at the SNR of each and every channel and at symmetry between channels. Unfortunately, there is no single
best method for measuring SNR. Below I explain the different methods used and the rationale for each.

SNR
One needs to measure the signal in the phantom (either mean or peak or both) and then divide that by the
background noise. Measuring the signal is fairly straightforward, the noise can be more problematic. The
simplest method is to measure the standard deviation (SD) in the background ‘air’. However, MRI images
are the magnitude of complex data. The noise in the underlying complex data is Gaussian but it follows a
Rician distribution when the magnitude is used. The true noise can be estimated by multiplying the mea-
sured SD by 1.526.

During the reconstruction process, most manufacturers perform various additional operations on the images,
This could include geometric distortion correction, low pass filtering of the k-space data resulting in low
signal at the edge of the images, RF coil intensity correction (PURE, CLEAR, SCIC, etc), and other pro-
cessing during the combination of phased array data and parallel imaging techniques. All of these methods
distort the background noise making it impossible to obtain an accurate (and reproducible) estimate of the
image noise in the air region. The alternative is to use a method which I shall refer to as the NEMA
(National Electrical Manufacturers Association) method. The signal in the phantom area is a sum of the
proton signal and noise. Once the signal to noise ratio exceeds 5:1, the noise in the magnitude image is
effectively Gaussian. To eliminate the proton signal, you acquire an image twice and subtract them. The
measured SD in the phantom region should now be the true SD times the square root of 2. When determin-
ing the SNR using the NEMA method, calculate the mean signal of the average of the two source images
then divide by .7071 x the SD measured in the same area as the mean signal.

Unfortunately, this doesn’t always work. It is absolutely imperative that the RF channel scalings, both trans-
mit and receive, be identical with both scans. Any ghosting in the system is not likely to repeat exactly for
both scans and will cause a much higher SD. Finally, the phantom needs to be resting in place prior to the
scan long enough for motion of the fluid to have died down. Depending on the size and shape of the phan-
tom, this could take any where from 5 to 20 minutes.

One of the most common causes of ghosting is vibration from the helium cold-head. The best way to elimi-
nate this artifact is to turn off the cold head, which will increase helium consumption. Because this vibra-
tion is periodic, the ghosting is usually of an N over 2 (N/2) nature. The affect inside the signal region of
the phantom can be minimized by using a FOV that is twice the diameter of the phantom (measured in the
PE direction.) If the noise is to be measured in the air, then be sure to NOT make measurements to either
side of the phantom in the PE direction.

Scan parameters also significantly affect measured SNR. For most of the testing performed in this document
I used a simple Spin Echo with a TR of 300, a TE of 20 and a slice thickness of 3mm and a receiver BW of
15.6 KHz. The FOV was varied depending on the size of the coil and the phantom used. All of the parame-
ters used for each test can be found on each page immediately below the coil description.

52
28
Report Layout
Each page of this report lists the data from a single test. The top third of the page describes the coil and
phantom information, followed by the scan parameters used. The middle third contains the numbers mea-
sured and calculated results. This section will contain one table if the coil being tested is a single channel
coil (i.e. quadrature or surface coils) and two tables if it is a multi-channel phased array coil. The entries in
the table will be described further below. The bottom section contains a few lines of comments (if
necessary), a picture of the coil with the phantom as used for the testing and one or more of the images that
were used for the measurements.

There is usually one image for each composite image measurement and one image for each separate channel
measurement. Each image shows the ROI (red line) where the mean signal was measured and two smaller
ROIs (green lines) where the signal minimum and maximum was found. In the top left corner of each image
is the mean signal in the large ROI. The bottom left corner contains the large ROI’s area (in mm2). The top
right corner contains two numbers a mean and a standard deviation. If the NEMA method was used, then
the top right corner will list the mean and SD of the large ROI (labeled ROI M and ROIsd) applied to the
subtraction image. If the noise was measured in the background air the the numbers are labeled Air M and
AirSD.

Data Tables
The meaning of most of the entries in the data table are should be self evident with a few exceptions. The
first column in each table is labeled “Label”. In the composite analysis, this field may be empty or contain
some sort of abbreviation to identify some aspect of the testing. Some possibilities are the letter N for
NEMA, A for Air, L for Left, R for Right, C for CLEAR, NoC for No CLEAR. In the Uncombined Image
table, the label usually contains the channel number or similar descriptor. The column labeled “Noise Type”
will be either Air or SubSig which stands for Subtracted Signal, i.e. the NEMA method. Both tables contain
a column for Mean SNR and Max SNR which are the Mean or Max signal divided by the SD of the noise
scaled by either 1.526 (Air) or 0.7071 (NEMA).

Composite Image Table: The final two columns in this table are “Normalized” and “Uniformity”. It can be
rather difficult to compare the performance of different coils particularly if different scan parameters are
used. (Of course, it’s even more difficult from one scanner to another.) I have standardized most of my test-
ing to use a spin echo with a TR/TE of 300/20msec and a thickness of 3 mm. The FOV changes to depend-
ing on the size of the phantom used although I try to use a FOV that is at least twice the diameter of the
phantom as measured in the PE direction. For one reason or another, a change may be made in the scan
parameters (either accidentally or intentionally such as turning on No Phase Wrap to eliminate aliasing, etc.).
In order to make it easier to compare SNR values I calculate a “Normalized” SNR value. This value is theo-
retically what the SNR would be if a FOV of 30cm, 256x256 matrix, 1 average, receiver BW of 15.6 KHz
and slice thickness of 3mm had been used. Obviously, the final number is affected by the T1/T2 values of
the phantoms used as well as details of the coil and magnet field strength but it can be useful in certain situa-
tions.

The “Uniformity” value is defined by the ACR as 1 - (max-min)/(max+min). This is most important when
looking at volume coils or for evaluating the effectiveness of surface coil intensity correction algorithms
(such as PURE, CLEAR or SCIC).

Uncombined Image Table: This table has two columns labeled “% of Mean” and “% of Max”. When ana-
lyzing multi-channel coils it is important to understand the relationship between the different channels, the
inherent symmetry that usually exists between channels. In a 8 channel head or 4 channel torso phased array
coil, all of the channels are usually have about the same SNR. These two columns list how the SNR (either
Mean or Max) of each channel compares to the SNR of the channel with the maximum value.

53
29