1999
DOI: 10.1109/42.796286
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Acoustic noise analysis in echo planar imaging: multicenter trial and comparison with other pulse sequences

Abstract: The purpose of this study was to evaluate acoustic noise in echo planar imaging (EPI) at various magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) centers and to compare EPI acoustic noise with that in other fast pulse sequences. We measured A-weighted root-mean-square sound pressure levels and peak impulse sound pressure levels for EPI, under the same conditions, in eleven clinical super-conducting MRI systems. We also compared sound pressure levels for the EPI and six different pulse sequences and analyzed the acoustic noise… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
14
2

Year Published

2000
2000
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
1
14
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The small but insignificant flattening of 0.5 dB(L) may tentatively be explained by restriction of extreme movements of the gradient coils, probably caused by the elastic properties of the gradient coil encasings. The frequency distribution of the pulse sequences tested was similar to that of previous reports [8,9,11,12,18]. Alterations of the frequency distribution were not expected a priori because of unchanged gradient current pulses and acoustic transfer function [15], which …”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 56%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The small but insignificant flattening of 0.5 dB(L) may tentatively be explained by restriction of extreme movements of the gradient coils, probably caused by the elastic properties of the gradient coil encasings. The frequency distribution of the pulse sequences tested was similar to that of previous reports [8,9,11,12,18]. Alterations of the frequency distribution were not expected a priori because of unchanged gradient current pulses and acoustic transfer function [15], which …”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 56%
“…This is relevant for measurements of acoustic noise, as it has been demonstrated previously that the type of imager dominates the overall acoustic noise levels [9,18], that is, the influence of the magnetic field strength on SPL might not adequately be elucidated by comparing various MR systems. The results of our experiments were in good agreement with what theory predicts, i.e.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…From the rate of increase in the noise level in the axial direction, it is estimated that the noise level at the position of the mice was between 90 and 100 dB. The measured acoustic noise level is near the OSHA standard for long-term exposure (90 -105 dB) (27).…”
Section: Acoustic Noisementioning
confidence: 68%
“…Sham MRI animals were placed in identical chambers outside the magnet at the 5 G line and remained there for the duration of the exposure. The acoustic sound level was measured (A scale weighting, peak response) at the position of the sham animals and at the bore opening of the magnet using a digital sound meter (model 01617-00, Cole-Parmer Instrument Company, Vernon Hills, IL) (27).…”
Section: Magnetic Field Exposure Systemmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…First, the background noise caused by compressors and air conditioning is often clearly audible, and potentially produces activation in both stimulated and nominally unstimulated epochs. More importantly, acquisition induces a loud burst of sound that exceeds 110 dB SPL in 1.5 Tesla ͑T͒ scanners and can be as high as 130 dB SPL in 3 T scanners ͑Shellock et Ravicz et al, 2000;Miyati et al, 1999;Foster et al, 2000͒. This scanner noise is potentially damaging to the listener's hearing ͑Foster et al, 2000͒, can be unpleasant, and leads to fatigue.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 96%