Calculations of the RF magnetic (B 1 ) field as a function of frequency between 64 and 345 MHz were performed for a head model in an idealized birdcage coil. Absorbed power (P abs ) and SNR were calculated at each frequency with three different methods of defining excitation pulse amplitude: maintaining 90°fl ip angle at the coil center (center ␣ Predictions of trends in signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and specific energy absorption rate (SAR) with increasing static magnetic field (B 0 ) strength based on MR theory, the principle of reciprocity, and analytical RF magnetic field (B 1 ) calculations have been shown to be reasonably accurate at frequencies up to 64 MHz in head-and body-sized samples (1,2). MRI experiments are currently performed at static magnetic field (B 0 ) strengths as high as 8.0 Tesla, where the frequency of the RF magnetic field (B 1 ) for imaging with 1 H is about 340 MHz. At these frequencies, significant interaction between the applied B 1 field and human tissues is expected. The effects of this interaction on SNR and the total absorbed power are complicated, and are dependent on the experiment being performed, RF coil type and performance, and even on the specific subject geometry and position in the coil (2,3).؍In this study we performed calculations of SAR in the head, the total absorbed power (P abs ) in the head and shoulders, and SNR on an axial plane of the head at several B 1 frequencies between 64 and 345 MHz for an anatomically-accurate model in an idealized birdcage coil. The head position and orientation, and the coil behavior are kept constant so that B 1 frequency and definition of the excitation pulse are the only variables. Electrical properties of all tissues are set appropriately at each frequency. The excitation pulse amplitude is defined with three different methods at each frequency.Since our interest was primarily in the effects of the high-frequency RF fields on the imaging experiment, we chose to ignore several factors that complicated both the calculation and interpretation of the results. We chose to consider signal from protons in water only, and to ignore T 1 and T 2 relaxation effects in this work. This simplifies the presentation of results, making them independent of TE and TR, but it also removes some realism from the simulation. We also neglected many other experimental effects, such as those of B 0 inhomogeneity, inevitable variation in sample and coil geometry, signal filtering, and signal amplifier integrity and performance (4). Thus, the findings concerning signal in the images, FID amplitude, and SNR presented here should be considered predictions of the types of phenomena that may be seen at high frequency due to behavior of the RF fields. Manifestation of these phenomena in experiment should not be expected to occur exactly as in these calculations.
METHODSThe finite difference time domain (FDTD) numerical method for electromagnetics was used to calculate all electrical and magnetic fields throughout a head model in an idealized birdcage coil. This me...