Table 2 Numerically simulated results of \({{\bf{B}}}_{{\bf{1}}}^{{\boldsymbol{+}}}\) transmit and averaged 10 g-averaged SAR efficiencies for different coils in four-channel configurations placed around two different human body voxel models.

From: A self-matched leaky-wave antenna for ultrahigh-field magnetic resonance imaging with low specific absorption rate

  

\({\langle {{\bf{B}}}_{{\bf{1}}}^{{\boldsymbol{+}}}\rangle }_{\text{ROI}}/\sqrt{{\text{P}}_{\text{acc}}}\)

\({\langle {{\bf{B}}}_{{\bf{1}}}^{{\boldsymbol{+}}}\rangle }_{\text{ROI}}/\sqrt{\max \left({{\rm{SAR}}}_{\text{10}\text{g}}\right)}\)

\(\max \left({{\rm{SAR}}}_{\text{10}\text{g}}\right)\)

Coil array

Body model

(μT  W−1/2)

(μT  W−1/2 kg1/2)

(W/kg)

LWA

Duke

0.091

0.193

0.22

Dipole

Duke

0.085

0.142

0.37

Stripline

Duke

0.068

0.075

0.81

Loop

Duke

0.081

0.092

0.77

Slot

Duke

0.054

0.049

1.1

LWA

Gustav

0.105

0.214

0.24

Dipole

Gustav

0.102

0.185

0.31

  1. \({{\bf{B}}}_{{\bf{1}}}^{{\boldsymbol{+}}}\) is averaged over the ROI, whereas the 10 g-averaged SAR is given in the maximum hotspot.
  2. Values to be compared are highlighted in bold.