Comparison of physiological noise at 1.5 T, 3 T and 7 T and optimization of fMRI acquisition parameters

• Published in: NeuroImage (Orlando, Fla.) Vol. 26; no. 1; pp. 243 - 250
• Main Authors: Triantafyllou, C., Hoge, R.D., Krueger, G., Wiggins, C.J., Potthast, A., Wiggins, G.C., Wald, L.L.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Elsevier Inc 15.05.2005; Elsevier Limited
• Subjects: 7 Tesla; Electromagnetic Fields; fMRI; Head - physiology; Head Movements - physiology; Humans; Image Processing, Computer-Assisted; Magnetic field strength; Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods; Magnetic Resonance Imaging - statistics & numerical data; Optimization; Oxygen - blood; Physiological noise; Scanners; SNR; Standard deviation; Physiological noise; fMRI; Magnetic field strength; SNR; 7 Tesla
• ISSN: 1053-8119; 1095-9572
• DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.01.007

Previous studies have shown that under some conditions, noise fluctuations in an fMRI time-course are dominated by physiological modulations of the image intensity with secondary contributions from thermal image noise and that these two sources scale differently with signal intensity, susceptibility weighting (TE) and field strength. The SNR of the fMRI time-course was found to be near its asymptotic limit for moderate spatial resolution measurements at 3 T with only marginal gains expected from acquisition at higher field strengths. In this study, we investigate the amplitude of image intensity fluctuations in the fMRI time-course at magnetic field strengths of 1.5 T, 3 T, and 7 T as a function of image resolution, flip angle and TE. The time-course SNR was a similar function of the image SNR regardless of whether the image SNR was modulated by flip angle, image resolution, or field strength. For spatial resolutions typical of those currently used in fMRI (e.g., 3 × 3 × 3 mm 3), increases in image SNR obtained from 7 T acquisition produced only modest increases in time-course SNR. At this spatial resolution, the ratio of physiological noise to thermal image noise was 0.61, 0.89, and 2.23 for 1.5 T, 3 T, and 7 T. At a resolution of 1 × 1 × 3 mm 3, however, the physiological to thermal noise ratio was 0.34, 0.57, and 0.91 for 1.5 T, 3 T and 7 T for TE near T2*. Thus, by reducing the signal strength using higher image resolution, the ratio of physiologic to image noise could be reduced to a regime where increased sensitivity afforded by higher field strength still translated to improved SNR in the fMRI time-series.