2913
Comparison of 2D-EPI, 3D-EPI and ERASE in terms of physiological noise, SNR and tSNR
Jae-Kyun Ryu1,2 and Jang-Yeon Park2,3,4
1Biomedical Institute for Convergence at SKKU, Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon, Korea, Republic of, 2Center for Neuroscience Imaging Research, Institute for Basic Science, Suwon, Korea, Republic of, 3Department of Biomedical Engineering, Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon, Korea, Republic of, 4Department of Intelligent Precision Healthcare Convergence, Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon, Korea, Republic of
ERASE sequence showed better tSNR than 2D and 3D GE-EPI, whereas it provided intermediate SNR between them. ERASE showed less physiological noise contribution (σP0 and l) than both 2D and 3D GE-EPI.
Figure2. (A) show SNR and tSNR maps from 2D/3D-EPI (blue/green squares) and ERASE (red circles) in the color scale range between 0~60 and 0~30. As shown in (B) where total voxel values of tSNR and SNR were scatter plotted. SNR: signal-to-noise ratio, tSNR: temporal SNR, error bars by ± standard error of mean (SEM).
Figure1. ERASE sequence diagram (A) and schematic description of its sequential and local excitation and refocusing mechanism in the SPEN direction (B). In the ERASE sequence, the excitation duration of the chirp pulse (Te) is set to be same as total acquisition duration (Ta) and, with a re-phasing gradient between them, all spins experience constant TE across an object (B). SPEN is applied for slab encoding in the slab-selective direction. Ge: excitation gradient, Ga: acquisition gradient, Gr: re-phasing gradient, RO: read-out, PE: phase-encoding, FM: frequency-modulation.