Anatomical and functional images were acquired using a Philips Ingenia 3.0 T MRI system (Philips Medical Systems, Best, The Netherlands) with a SENSE 32 elements head coil. To minimize movement artifacts, participants’ heads were fixed using foam padding. A whole-brain anatomical T1-weighted image (3D MP-RAGE) was acquired (voxel size = 1 mm3, TR/TE = 7000/3.2 ms, matrix = 256 × 256, field of view = 256 × 240 mm, 180 sagittal slices). Whole-brain functional images were acquired using transverse T2*-weighted Echo-Planar Imaging (EPI; TR/TE = 2,000/27 ms, matrix = 80 × 80, in-plane resolution = 3 × 3 mm, slice thickness = 3 mm, slice gap = 0.3 mm, 37 ascending slices), which uses a gradient-echo pulse sequence for detecting BOLD contrast.
Ingenia 3.0t mri system
Manufactured by Philips
Sourced in United States
The Ingenia 3.0T MRI system is a magnetic resonance imaging device developed by Philips. It operates at a static magnetic field strength of 3.0 tesla, providing high-resolution imaging capabilities. The system is designed to acquire detailed anatomical and functional data for medical diagnostic purposes.
Automatically generated - may contain errors
Lab products found in correlation
7 protocols using ingenia 3.0t mri system
1
Optimized MRI Acquisition for Brain Imaging
2
Imaging Techniques for Osteoarthritis Assessment
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
Knee joint images were captured by X-ray (MX-20, Faxitron X-ray, Corp., Lincolnshire, IL, United States) and SkyScan 1276 Micro-CT (Bruker, Kontich, Belgium) and NRecon version 1.6 software (Bruker) and Ingenia3.0 T MRI system (Philips, United States). The rats were anesthetized by intraperitoneal injection of pentobarbital sodium (40 mg/kg) and fixed in supine position. The bilateral ankles were fixed on the tray with adhesive tape. The lens was focused at an appropriate focal length on the knee joint of the rat and the exposure time was set to apropriate minutes to ensure a clear image. The extent of osteoarthritis was assessed by imaging findings, including joint space narrowing and articular surface calcification, as well as articular cartilage damage, according to the imaging scoring system used in previous literature with macroscopic score which was based on surface roughness and erosin. Using imaging techniques, we quantified the tibial plateau or femoral condyle surface by calculating the ratio of the lesion area to the total surface area. Both the tibial and femoral joints were evaluated based on a maximum score of 10 (Gerwin et al., 2010 (link); Kohn et al., 2016 (link); Lin et al., 2021 (link)). The scoring was performed by two experienced observers who were blinded to the study groups.
3
Triceps Surae Muscle-Tendon Morphology Analysis
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
MRI images were taken from the right leg to measure morphological parameters of the triceps sure muscle tendon complex. A 3T Philips scanner (Ingenia 3.0T MRI system, Amsterdam, Netherlands) was used to acquire the MRI images. The runners were positioned supine, with neutral knee (180° between shank and thigh) and ankle joint angles (90° between foot and shank). A foam pad was placed below the calcaneus that elevated the leg slightly and prevented weight-induced deformation of the muscle during the scan. The scans were performed using a T1-weighted turbo spin echo sequence (slice thickness = 5 mm, slice gap = 0 mm, slice scan order: interleaved, TR = 650 ms, TE = 20) for all measurements. Because of the limited field of view of the probe (FOV = 40 cm), the images were taken in two parts to ensure that the records contained the origin and insertion of the plantar flexor muscle–tendon complex. The overlapping images were manually removed from the analysis. The axes during the MRI image acquisition was set carefully to align as possible as it can with the muscle–tendon unit.
4
Functional MRI Brain Imaging Protocol
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
Anatomical and functional images were acquired using a Philips Ingenia 3.0 T MRI system (Philips Medical Systems, Best, the Netherlands) with a SENSE 32 elements head coil. An anatomical T1-weighted image (3D MP-RAGE) was acquired for normalization purposes [voxel size = 1 mm3, TR/TE = 7000/3.2 ms, matrix = 256 × 256, field of view (FOV) = 256 × 240 mm, 180 sagittal slices]. Functional images were acquired using T2*-weighted Echo-Planar Imaging (EPI) [TR/TE = 2000/27 ms, matrix = 80 × 80, in-plane resolution = 3 × 3 mm, slice thickness = 3 mm, slice gap = 0.3 mm, 37 axial slices].
Imaging data were analyzed with SPM8 (Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, London). During pre-processing, images were realigned to correct for motion-related artifacts and slice-timing correction was applied for differences in acquisition time. Images were then coregistered with the anatomical image (MP-RAGE) and normalized to the Montreal Neurological Institute (MNI) space template using segmentation of the anatomical scan. Data were resliced with a 2 × 2 × 2 mm resolution and spatially smoothed with an 8 mm full width at half maximum Gaussian kernel.
Imaging data were analyzed with SPM8 (Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, London). During pre-processing, images were realigned to correct for motion-related artifacts and slice-timing correction was applied for differences in acquisition time. Images were then coregistered with the anatomical image (MP-RAGE) and normalized to the Montreal Neurological Institute (MNI) space template using segmentation of the anatomical scan. Data were resliced with a 2 × 2 × 2 mm resolution and spatially smoothed with an 8 mm full width at half maximum Gaussian kernel.
5
Knee MRI Imaging in SD Rats
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
MRI of the knee joints was performed using a Ingenia3.0 T MRI system (Philips) operated by a technician, in which bilateral ankles of SD rats were fixed on the pallet. Briefly, knee joints were surveyed twice for accuracy of location after placing the special coil. Then, sagittal and coronal sections were scanned with the 3D_WATSc program. MRI scan evaluation was based on cartilage loss, osteophytes formation, and subchondral sclerosis (Hunter et al., 2011 ).
6
Multimodal Brain Imaging Protocol
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
Images were acquired on a Philips Ingenia 3.0 T MRI system (Philips Medical Systems, Best, the Netherlands) with a 32-channel head coil. To minimize movement artifacts, participants’ heads were fixed using foam padding and participants were asked to lay as still as possible. We acquired whole-brain anatomical T1-weighted images (3D MP-RAGE, SENSE factor = 2.5, voxel size = 1 mm3, TR/TE = 7000/3.2 ms, matrix = 256×256, field of view = 256×240 mm, 180 transverse slices, scanning time 4 min and 14 s, automatic T1 stabilization) and diffusion-weighted images (2D spin-echo using a single shell without multiband acceleration and cardiac gating, SENSE factor = 2, slice thickness = 2 mm, TR/TE = 8015/92 ms, matrix = 112×112, field of view = 224 mm, 60 transverse slices, whole brain coverage) with diffusion gradients applied along 64 (n = 46, scanning time 9 min and 31 s) or 48 (n = 3; 1 control and 2 patients, scanning time 6 min and 59 s) directions (b = 1000 s/mm2), and 4 (n = 36) or 1 (n = 13; 7 controls and 6 patients) reference b = 0 image(s). No reverse-phase encoded scans were acquired. All DICOM files were converted to NifTI format using dcm2niix (https://github.com/rordenlab/dcm2niix Supplementary Table 1 for additional acquisition information.
7
Multimodal MRI Brain Tumor Segmentation
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
Dataset. Three modalities of MRI of T1, CET1 and T2 of 149 patients are acquired at Shandong Cancer Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University.
These patients are scanned with Philips Ingenia 3.0T MRI system. Both CET1 and T2 are aligned to T1. Different 3D images might have different resolutions, for example, they might have sampling spacings from 0.33mm and 0.69mm along X and Y axes, and 3.5mm to 5.5mm along Z axis (i. e, the spacing between adjacent sectional images). Thus, we resample these 3D images such that they all have the same spacing along X and Y axes (0.5mm) while keeping their respective Z-spacing unchanged to avoid obtaining unreal images. After resampling, the sizes of 3D images are ranged from [24, 387, 387] to [56, 520, 520]. The ground truth is created by an experienced radiologist and marked slice by slice.
Preprocessing. The preprocessing mainly contains intensity normalization and ROIs cropping. We utilize the intra-body intensity normalization proposed in [43] , which effectively deals with the differences caused by imaging configurations and the influences of inconsistent body-to-background ratios. After normalization, according to the distribution histogram of normalized data, we are applied. The illustration of preprocessing is shown in Figure 6.
These patients are scanned with Philips Ingenia 3.0T MRI system. Both CET1 and T2 are aligned to T1. Different 3D images might have different resolutions, for example, they might have sampling spacings from 0.33mm and 0.69mm along X and Y axes, and 3.5mm to 5.5mm along Z axis (i. e, the spacing between adjacent sectional images). Thus, we resample these 3D images such that they all have the same spacing along X and Y axes (0.5mm) while keeping their respective Z-spacing unchanged to avoid obtaining unreal images. After resampling, the sizes of 3D images are ranged from [24, 387, 387] to [56, 520, 520]. The ground truth is created by an experienced radiologist and marked slice by slice.
Preprocessing. The preprocessing mainly contains intensity normalization and ROIs cropping. We utilize the intra-body intensity normalization proposed in [43] , which effectively deals with the differences caused by imaging configurations and the influences of inconsistent body-to-background ratios. After normalization, according to the distribution histogram of normalized data, we are applied. The illustration of preprocessing is shown in Figure 6.
About PubCompare
Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.
We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.
However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.
Ready to get started?
Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required
Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!