The radiofrequency (RF) receive array coil is a complicated device with many inductors and capacitors and serves as one of the most critical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) electronic devices. It directly determines the achievable level of signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). Simply put, however, the RF coil is nothing but an LC circuit. The receive array coil was first proposed more than 20 years ago, evolving from a simple arrangement with a few electronic channels to a complicated system of 128 channels, enabling highly sophisticated parallel imaging, at different field strengths. This article summarizes the basic concepts pertaining to RF receive coil arrays and their associated SNR and reviews the theories behind the major components of such arrays. This includes discussions of the intrinsic SNR of a receive coil, the matching circuits, low-noise preamplifiers, coupling/decoupling amongst coils, the coupling between receive and transmit coils, decoupling via preamplifiers, and baluns. An 8-channel receive array coil on a cylindrical former serves as a useful example for demonstrating various points in the review.

Li-O2/CO2 battery is of central importance for environmentally friendly energy technologies. However, the battery performance still needs to be improved while the factors affecting the battery capacity are still ambiguous....

No abstract

Purpose We have developed a fully 3D data acquisition system for microwave breast imaging which can operate simultaneously inside a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). MRI is used regularly for breast imaging to distinguish tumors from normal tissue. It generally has poor specificity unless used with a gadolinium contrast agent. Microwave imaging could fill this need because of the good endogenous tumor:normal tissue property contrast, especially in light of safety concerns for gadolinium. The antenna array consists of 16 monopole antennas positioned in a horizontal circle surrounding the breast which can then be moved vertically for 3D coverage of the breast. The tank system materials were chosen to minimize artifacts in the MR image within the specific shared imaging zone. The support rods are stainless steel, albeit positioned sufficiently far from the imaging target to have little effect. The mechanical motion parts are all 3D printed plastic. Unlike many conventional antennas, the monopoles consist of just the center conductor and insulator of the coaxial cable, making it one of the least possible metallic structures. Methods Data were acquired both inside and outside of the MR bore to confirm that the MR bore did not have adverse effects on the microwave imaging process. The imaging tank was filled with a mixture of glycerin and water to both provide a reasonable property match to the phantom and to highly attenuate the fields which also acted to suppress multi‐path signals. Microwave images were reconstructed using our Gauss–Newton scheme combined with a log transformation for a more linear convergence. MR images were also acquired to assess the effects of the microwave tank structures on the imaging. Results The microwave measurement data were acquired in log magnitude and phase format at 200 MHz increments from 700–1900 MHz. Each antenna acted sequentially as a transmitter while the complement of 15 acted as a receiver. The single frequency images were reconstructed using a Gauss–Newton iterative technique with a standard log transformation to linearize the process. The data showed that the signal strengths were between 7–10 dB lower for the case when the array was inside the MRI versus when not. Notwithstanding, the image quality was still high because of the significant signal to noise ratio. The reconstructed images in both situations demonstrated good 3D object recovery of the vertically size and shaped varying object. The MR images were not adversely affected by the presence of antennas or feed structures. Conclusions We have demonstrated that our technique can recover high‐quality images of a 3D varying object within an MRI system. Compatibility issues have been addressed for both the microwave and MRI systems. The reduced SNR for the case operating in the MRI did not adversely affect the images. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first example of a microwave imaging system operating in an MRI with full 3D volumetric capability.

No abstract