Purpose To evaluate the use of magnetic resonance fingerprinting (MRF) for simultaneous quantification of T1 and T2∗ in a single breath‐hold in the kidneys. Methods The proposed kidney MRF sequence was based on MRF echo‐planar imaging. Thirty‐five measurements per slice and overall 4 slices were measured in 15.4 seconds. Group matching was performed for in‐line quantification of T1 and T2∗. Images were acquired in a phantom and 8 healthy volunteers in coronal orientation. To evaluate our approach, region of interests were drawn in the kidneys to calculate mean values and standard deviations of the T1 and T2∗ times. Precision was calculated across multiple repeated MRF scans. Gaussian filtering is applied on baseline images to improve SNR and match stability. Results T1 and T2∗ times acquired with MRF in the phantom showed good agreement with reference measurements and conventional mapping methods with deviations of less than 5% for T1 and less than 10% for T2∗. Baseline images in vivo were free of artifacts and relaxation times yielded good agreement with conventional methods and literature (deviation T1:7±4%, T2∗:6±3%). Conclusions In this feasibility study, the proposed renal MRF sequence resulted in accurate T1 and T2∗ quantification in a single breath‐hold.

The assessment of language lateralization has become widely used when planning neurosurgery close to language areas, due to individual specificities and potential influence of brain pathology. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) allows non-invasive and quantitative assessment of language lateralization for presurgical planning using a laterality index (LI). However, the conventional method is limited by the dependence of the LI on the chosen activation threshold. To overcome this limitation, different threshold-independent LI calculations have been reported. The purpose of this study was to propose a simplified approach to threshold-independent LI calculation and compare it with three previously reported methods on the same cohort of subjects. Fifteen healthy subjects, who performed picture naming, verb generation, and word fluency tasks, were scanned. LI values were calculated for all subjects using four methods, and considering either the whole hemisphere or an atlas-defined language area. For each method, the subjects were ranked according to the calculated LI values, and the obtained rankings were compared. All LI calculation methods agreed in differentiating strong from weak lateralization on both hemispheric and regional scales (Spearman's correlation coefficients 0.59-1.00). In general, a more lateralized activation was found in the language area than in the whole hemisphere. The new method is well suited for application in the clinical practice as it is simple to implement, fast, and robust. The good agreement between LI calculation methods suggests that the choice of method is not key. Nevertheless, it should be consistent to allow a relative comparison of language lateralization between subjects.