English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse
  1. View item / 
  2. Item Summary

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT
Add to Basket
  Local TagsRelease HistoryDetailsSummary

Released
Poster

Fitting comparison for 9.4T 1D semi-LASER and 2D-J-resolved semi-LASER data

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons214688

Borbáth,  T
Research Group MR Spectroscopy and Ultra-High Field Methodology, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;
Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons192635

Giapitzakis,  IA
Research Group MR Spectroscopy and Ultra-High Field Methodology, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;
Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons215115

Murali Manohar,  SV
Research Group MR Spectroscopy and Ultra-High Field Methodology, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;
Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons84402

Henning,  A
Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;
Research Group MR Spectroscopy and Ultra-High Field Methodology, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

External Resource

Link
(Any fulltext)

Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)
There are no public fulltexts stored in PuRe
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Borbáth, T., Giapitzakis, I., Murali Manohar, S., & Henning, A. (2017). Fitting comparison for 9.4T 1D semi-LASER and 2D-J-resolved semi-LASER data. Poster presented at 25th Annual Meeting and Exhibition of the International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine (ISMRM 2017), Honolulu, HI, USA.


Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0000-C491-E
Abstract
In this abstract, we present an adapted version of the ProFit-V2 fitting software to fit J-resolved semi-LASER data at 9.4T. Simulated basis sets with ideal pulses show the need to reduce the echo time to account for the spin locking effect of the adiabatic pulses. Further, a comparison of the fitting error estimations using correlation matrices and Cramer-Rao Lower Bounds with a metabolite cycled semi-LASER fitted with LCModel is done.