Measurements reveal minor differences in g-factors with metasurface resonators compared to conventional coils, suggesting promising compatibility.
Motivation: Metasurface resonators lead to a focusing of individual receive coils' sensitivity profiles, which might contradict parallel imaging methods. It has to be quantified to what degree this occurs to evaluate the feasibility of parallel imaging acceleration while using metasurfaces. Goal(s): Quantify the compatibility of wireless metasurface resonators with parallel imaging. Approach: Measurement of the inverse g-factors when using either the metasurface resonator or alternatively a conventional 4-channel coil, both combined with the table-integrated spine coil. This is done in phantom and in vivo. Results: Minor differences (Δmean ≤ 0.05) were measured particularly in anterior-posterior acceleration when compared with an alternative conventional 4-channel coil. Impact: We demonstrated and quantified the compatibility of wireless metasurface resonators with parallel imaging in phantom and in vivo. This enables future studies to expand the application area of these novel coil alternatives or develop special designs for improved parallel imaging.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kowal et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: