Methodological study demonstrates high-accuracy B1 mapping via model-based TurboFLASH fitting at 7 T and 11.7 T, indicating enhanced multi-channel RF array calibration with reduced scan noise.
Purpose Transmit (B 1 + ) and receive (B 1 − ) sensitivities of parallel‐transmit/receive RF array are a prerequisite for modern ultra‐high‐field MRI. Their accurate mapping remains challenging for coils with high transmit dynamic range, particularly in regions with low combined‐mode B 1 + magnitude, where standard reconstruction is impaired by noise. This work presents a new B 1 + and B 1 − model‐based fitting approach for interferometric presaturated TurboFLASH (satTFL) data. With an optimized acquisition scheme, this method improves B 1 + /B 1 − mapping accuracy. Methods Voxel‐wise B 1 + and B 1 − are expressed as the product of a complex unit‐norm vector (phasor) and a scalar (efficiency). Phasors are estimated through singular value decomposition of satTFL signals, and efficiencies are recovered with fitting to the signal equation. This method was evaluated in phantom simulations for 7 T and 11.7 T 8Tx/32Rx RF arrays and compared with standard approaches. As it supports a variable number of pre‐saturated scans, different interferometric schemes were optimized for B 1 + accuracy. Finally, schemes yielding acceptable B 1 + error with minimal acquisition time were tested in vitro at 7 T and 11.7 T and in vivo at 7 T. Results The proposed method provided lower median B 1 + and B 1 − errors than conventional satTFL methods and fewer outliers; the number of voxels with error > 30% is reduced from several dozens to zero. In vitro results were consistent with the simulations, and in vivo maps demonstrated good quality. Conclusion The proposed method improves B 1 + and B 1 − mapping robustness to noise and enables more flexible satTFL acquisition scheme, allowing better trade‐offs between accuracy and scan time.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dudysheva et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: