Computer-implemented method for operating magnetic resonance device, magnetic resonance device, computer program and electronically readable data carrier

Abstract

The invention relates to a computer-implemented method for operating a magnetic resonance apparatus for imaging, comprising an operating device which provides a user interface for setting a sequence of measurement protocols to be carried out on an examination object during an examination process, wherein the measurement protocol is examined in at least one examination process in regard to whether at least one safety requirement relating to the examination object and / or the magnetic resonance device is followed, and is executed only if each of the at least one safety requirement is met, a measurement protocol is marked as check-ready, the check-ready signal displaying an ongoing user input describing an end of the user setting the selected measurement protocol for the check process, such that at least one of the at least one check process is executable. Before rounds to a measurement protocol for execution according to a sequence in the inspection process, the process is executable and / or executed.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to a computer-implemented method for operating a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) apparatus, the MRI apparatus including an operating device that provides a user interface, particularly a graphical user interface, for setting a sequence of measurement protocols to be executed at the object being inspected during an inspection process. The set measurement protocols are checked during at least one inspection process for compliance with at least one safety requirement relating to the object being inspected and / or the MRI apparatus, and are executed only if each of the at least one safety requirement is met. Furthermore, this invention relates to an MRI apparatus, a computer program, and an electronically readable data carrier. Background Technology

[0002] Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a widely established tool in medical diagnostics and interventional monitoring. Here, different aspects of the object being examined, particularly the interior of a patient, can be examined using different MRI sequences achieved through different measurement protocols. It is common practice in this context to use multiple measurement protocols during the examination, meaning that the sequence of measurement protocols (possibly including their parameters) is defined before the examination begins.

[0003] For this purpose, the operating mechanism of an imaging magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) device typically provides a user interface in which the sequence of measurement protocols can be defined. For example, it is known to sequence different measurement protocols, for instance, by dragging and dropping them into a list corresponding to a waiting queue, either during preparation for the examination or also during the examination itself. In the corresponding illustration, the protocol parameters of the measurement protocol can optionally be adjusted to take into account the specific requirements of the subject being examined, particularly the patient or the examination itself. This may include adjusting sequence parameters, image resolution, and / or scan time. Subsequently, the measurement protocol or its associated illustration can be closed, and the measurement protocol waits in the waiting queue until its execution.

[0004] In imaging magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) devices, specific safety requirements must be met regarding the patient being examined, as well as the components of the MRI device itself, measurement protocols, and the overall sequence. These safety requirements may concern not only the safety of the patient but also system safety. Regarding patient safety, considerations should include, for example, SAR load, potential neural stimulation, and implant-related factors. Regarding system safety and image quality assurance, safety requirements may include: adherence to technical specifications, such as gradient specifications; energy deposition in the magnet; and the use of charge balance models to prevent overload of the radio frequency amplifier (RFPA).

[0005] Therefore, it is known in the prior art that at least one check procedure is performed before executing the corresponding measurement protocol to check compliance with safety requirements and to ensure that all protocol parameters and the resulting magnetic resonance pulses (gradient pulses and radio frequency pulses) are within safe and reliable limits defined by the safety requirements. Typically, multiple check procedures are used, for example, using corresponding algorithms and / or check procedures that can be associated with different safety requirements. This ensures that the check procedure can be performed safely and effectively without jeopardizing the patient's health or the state of the magnetic resonance device. The number of check procedures is currently increasing due to growing regulatory requirements and the desire to use hardware as optimally and gently as possible.

[0006] Specifically, at least a portion of the known inspection process can be divided into two distinct categories. On the one hand, it is possible to simulate a representative segment of the corresponding measurement protocol (the so-called ::check()-Methode); on the other hand, it is also possible to simulate (“unfold”) the entire measurement protocol (the so-called ::run()-Methode). Furthermore, it is known that calculations are performed based on computational values ​​derived from the measurement protocol, particularly from magnetic resonance sequences.

[0007] If a check fails in at least one of the checks, i.e., if at least one security requirement is not met (e.g., the value to be checked exceeds a preset limit), then at least one measure is taken to eliminate the problem or to eliminate the problem on the user side. For example, the so-called solution process is known as a computational process, which, for example, uses a so-called solver to obtain new recommendations for the protocol parameters and / or measurement protocol that meet the security requirements. These recommendations can then be presented to the user via a user interface. The solution space is expanded within at least one, and typically multiple, protocol parameters based on which check failed, and the adjusted measurement protocol is simulated in multiple iterations to find a combination of protocol parameters that resolves the problem. For each iteration, the measurement protocol needs to be resimulated or recalculated. In this case, it may occur that multiple solution processes must be executed sequentially, for example, when different checks fail or when different security requirements are violated.

[0008] The necessary sequence simulation and computation are lengthy and computationally resource-intensive because they must ensure that the new protocol parameters not only eliminate the original problem but also do not introduce new ones. Therefore, problem-solving in cases of security violations can be lengthy, impacting the entire inspection process.

[0009] Part of the problem is that inspection and, if necessary, problem-solving can only be performed once the final sequence of the measurement protocol, and consequently the final sequence of the magnetic resonance pulses, is known. Inspection only begins moment before measurement, i.e., just before the inspection process starts, where inspection and, optionally, problem-solving, can take 15 to 30 seconds, or even minutes in extreme cases. In a tightly scheduled inspection process, this can cause severe, intolerable delays. This, in turn, can lead to specific characteristics and / or protocol parameters known to the user as potentially causing problems becoming unusable. For example, the measurement protocol might have been "worse" to select and configure from the outset to avoid delays caused by problem-solving.

[0010] After checking and optionally resolving the problem, the calculated solution recommendations, i.e., changes to the measurement protocol and / or protocol parameters, are displayed to the user in the user interface, for example, via a corresponding window, especially a pop-up. The user can check the recommended changes and decide whether they want to accept them. In this case, it is possible that the solution recommendations do not meet the user's intentions, forcing the user to return to the sequence of setting the measurement protocol, make changes to resolve the problem, and re-check. This results in significant time loss.

[0011] As already stated above, a solution to the aforementioned problem is to simulate only a representative portion of the corresponding measurement protocol, which saves time compared to simulating the entire measurement protocol. However, this has the following drawbacks: in the case of complex MRI sequence protocols with a large number of possible combinations of protocol parameters, it cannot cover all extreme cases. If critical locations are not included in the representative portion but are performed during the examination, the examination process may be interrupted during runtime if limits are exceeded or, in general, safety requirements are violated, which is undesirable. In particular, this is problematic in the case of contrast agent administration, as the measurement protocol and at least one MRI sequence must be performed at a specific time point after contrast agent administration to properly image the contrast agent. In this case, repeating the examination process is not directly feasible, necessitating a re-appointment of the patient.

[0012] It has also been proposed that optimizing MRI sequences and measurement protocols to enable faster inspection and thus faster problem-solving is feasible. This is extremely costly for MRI sequence developers and often comes with user-imposed limitations. For example, the parameter space of the measurement protocol can be limited by increasing the step size of individual protocol parameters and / or narrowing the allowed limits. This speeds up the search for solutions, however, it severely restricts the feasibility of user designs. Summary of the Invention

[0013] Therefore, the objective of this invention is to reduce waiting time in terms of checking safety requirements and, optionally, resolving problems.

[0014] To achieve this objective, the present invention provides a computer-implemented method, a magnetic resonance apparatus, a computer program, and an electronically readable data carrier. Advantageous improvements are described below.

[0015] According to the present invention, in a method of the type mentioned at the beginning, it is proposed that: upon receiving a check ready signal, the selected measurement protocol is marked as check ready, the check ready signal indicating user input that has been performed, the user input describing the user's completion of setting the selected measurement protocol for the check process, such that at least one executable check process in at least one check process is already executable and / or executed before the measurement protocol is turned in sequence for execution during the check process, particularly during the setting of at least one additional measurement protocol on the user side.

[0016] Therefore, it is proposed that the inspection process, and especially the resolution process for determining changes in the measurement protocol that cause safety requirements (which will be discussed in detail below), be implemented before the measurement protocol is even reached during the inspection process. This is done by implementing user input, which ultimately displays the set measurement protocol as "final," making it available for use and marking the measurement protocol as "check ready." In particular, the inspection and optional problem-solving can be performed before the sequence setup ends and optionally during the setup of other measurement protocols. In other words, the inspection and optional solution finding can be carried out while the measurement protocol is still in the waiting queue. Through user input, the user ultimately indicates that they no longer intend to further change the corresponding measurement protocol, so that at that point in time, especially while the measurement protocol is in the waiting queue, the inspection and, in particular, the problem-solving can also be calculated. Therefore, the inspection and optional problem-solving do not occur only after the sequence setup has ended or when the measurement protocol should be executed, but rather begin at an earlier point in time once the operator releases the measurement protocol for inspection.

[0017] This improved manipulation and use of the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) device and its computing unit offers clear technical advantages. On the one hand, more efficient use of computational resources is possible; on the other hand, shorter waiting times before or during the inspection process are also feasible. Protocol checks and, optionally, finding solutions can be performed while the measurement protocol is in the waiting queue, and even while the sequence is still being set. Therefore, significant time savings are achieved because the measurement protocols can be executed directly and sequentially, eliminating delays caused by computationally intensive checks / problem-solving.

[0018] The inspection process can be understood as a computational process that implements at least a portion of an algorithm for inspecting at least one security requirement. The inspection process utilizes input data, which in particular includes protocol parameters of at least the corresponding measurement protocol, to obtain output data relating to compliance with the security requirement, i.e., specifically capable of indicating compliance or non-compliance (inspection failure) and / or usable for determining compliance or non-compliance. Here, the inspection process does not necessarily have to include a complete inspection, but it is also possible to propose that at least one inspection process involves sub-processes of the entire process, which can be performed independently of the rest of the entire process. For example, if the SAR should be calculated for comparison with a limit value, then the SAR is also related to a previous measurement protocol or, in general, the history of the inspection process, which may not yet exist, for example because the previous measurement protocol has not been fully set and / or has not been executed when, for the monitor, it should be operating with the aid of actual measured values. Therefore, the measurement protocols in the waiting queue may not be fully checked yet, but some pre-computation can still be performed so that when there is historical data before the measurement protocol is executed or when, for example, after a previous measurement protocol check is ready, additional input information from the history is added, which can still significantly speed up the computation.

[0019] Similarly, the solution process involves a computational process, which in particular implements at least a portion of an algorithm for obtaining a solution proposal when at least one security requirement is violated, provided that the at least one security requirement is not violated.

[0020] Not only for inspection but also for problem-solving, algorithms and / or procedural mechanisms known in principle in the prior art can be used in general. However, in particular, at least one inspection process and / or at least one solution process includes simulation of at least one part of the measurement protocol to be inspected and / or modified. Simulation (as already explained at the beginning) is particularly time-consuming, making it significant to perform the simulation at the earliest possible point in time, resulting in significant time savings and efficiency improvements. This is especially applicable to solution processes that operate iteratively, particularly in optimization methods, where simulations must be repeatedly performed for each test set of protocol parameters. Therefore, particularly significant advantages can be achieved for inspection and solution processes that incorporate simulation.

[0021] Specifically, for example, it is possible to propose at least one aspect of the examination process involving the SAR load and / or neural load and / or field and field distribution of the examined subject for the suitability of the implant for the examined subject and / or the guarantee of the image quality sought in the examination process and / or compliance with at least one technical specification of the magnetic resonance imaging device, particularly with respect to gradient coil devices and / or radio frequency coil devices and / or amplifier devices, and / or the thermal performance of the magnetic resonance imaging device. The corresponding examination process (and solution process), i.e., the calculation process, is already known in principle in the prior art and can also be used within the scope of this invention.

[0022] An improved embodiment of the invention proposes checking executability conditions to determine the executability of a corresponding inspection process, said executability conditions at least indicating the presence of all input data required for the inspection process. In other words, it is not mandatory that the process is already executable simply because the protocol settings are displayed on the user side as indicating that all inspection processes have been completed, as, for example, input data for the inspection process that is outside the measurement protocol may still be missing. Specifically, it can be proposed that, in the selected measurement protocol of at least one other measurement protocol in the reference sequence and / or in the input data of at least one previous measurement protocol in the sequence, the executability condition check is performed to determine whether the other measurement protocol and / or the previous measurement protocol itself has been marked as inspection-ready. For example, protocol parameters can be linked to protocol parameters of a previous measurement protocol, meaning they correspond to or are related to them. In this case, the inspection process is executed only when the protocol parameters required as input data for the reference, i.e., the other measurement protocol, are determined—in other words, when the other measurement protocol is also marked as inspection-ready. In another example, to calculate certain characteristic values, particularly thermal characteristic values ​​(especially the temperature of components in a magnetic resonance imaging device) and / or SAR, input data from at least one previous measurement protocol is required, specifically input data from all previous measurement protocols. Therefore, the executability of the corresponding inspection procedure is determined only when all these required previous measurement protocols and their protocol parameters are determined, i.e., marked as inspection-ready. The executability condition can also correspondingly check the execution of at least one resolution procedure associated with the corresponding inspection procedure.

[0023] In the less preferred first variant, it is possible to execute all executable checks once the check is marked as ready. This means that checks can begin immediately whenever feasible. This maximizes time gains; however, if the timing is unfavorable, it can lead to extremely high computational loads on the MRI machine, which could undesirably impact other computational processes.

[0024] Therefore, a preferred second variant of the invention proposes to assess availability conditions indicating the existence of sufficient idle computing resources based on load rate information describing the load rate of at least one computing unit of the magnetic resonance apparatus. These availability conditions are specifically for the corresponding executable inspection process (or optionally, a resolution process), and when the availability conditions are met, the executable inspection process (or resolution process) is executed. In other words, intelligent management of computing resources is possible. Specifically, the computation of the inspection process (and similarly, the resolution process) can always be performed when computing resources, especially computation time and capacity, are available on at least one suitable computing unit of the magnetic resonance apparatus. Thus, it is particularly advantageous that the computing unit is also used during its non-full load or even unloaded periods, resulting in particularly efficient use of the computing resources of the magnetic resonance apparatus, which also leads to a significant reduction in waiting time during the inspection process. In particular, the at least one computing unit can be a computing unit of the control device of the magnetic resonance apparatus, especially a computing unit of the protocol computer. If, in principle, the computing unit, especially the protocol computer, is also needed for other preparation processes or even for measurement protocols that are already required during execution, then it is possible to target unused stages of computing resources, which can then be used to inspect the process (and optionally resolve the process).

[0025] To minimize or ideally avoid impacting, and especially to avoid impairing, other calculations, particularly those relating to the setting and / or execution of measurement protocols, a suitable improvement of the invention proposes using prioritization when allocating computational resources. This prioritizes the checking process (and optionally the resolving process) over at least one computational process involving the user interface, particularly any other computational process used to set up and / or prepare the checking process, and / or over at least one computational process used to execute the measurement protocol, particularly any other computational process used to execute the measurement protocol. Therefore, computational resources are thus provided only for the checking process and optionally for the resolving process when they are not needed by the "more urgent" processes.

[0026] A specific first alternative for implementing user input can be proposed, whereby a check readiness signal is generated in the diagram for setting the selected measurement protocol when the setting completion operation element of the user interface is manipulated. In other words, in this variant, additional operation elements in the user interface can be discarded, and a "dual function" can be assigned to the setting completion operation element: the setting completion operation element not only ends the setting of the measurement protocol, particularly by closing the corresponding diagram (e.g., a window), but also causes the selected measurement protocol to be marked as check ready. Such a setting completion operation element could be, for example, an "Ok" operation element.

[0027] However, in a more advantageous second alternative of the invention, it is also feasible to check that a ready signal is generated upon manipulation of a locking operation element, which causes an abort of any change to the selected measurement protocol. In this case, it is particularly advantageous that the locking operation element can be displayed in a list-style diagram of the sequence of measurement protocols. Therefore, a new operation element, i.e., a locking operation element, can be added to each measurement protocol in the sequence, which can be understood as a type of "lock" or "abstain" button. This confirms to the user that they no longer intend to make further changes to the measurement protocol.

[0028] Preferably, the aborted state is displayed, particularly in a list-style diagram, especially by changing the locking operation element and / or by outputting the corresponding icon and / or by removing the icon indicating the processing status, particularly the "Working Man" icon. For example, a user interface is known in which a measurement protocol is still in editing or editable, marked with a corresponding icon, such as the so-called "Working Man" icon. Manipulating the locking operation element now causes the removal of this icon, clearly indicating that the measurement protocol is no longer set to be editable. The icon indicating the editing status can be replaced, for example, by displaying the aborted state icon, and / or can be used when no such icon exists. However, it is also possible to change the locking operation element, for example, by highlighting or padlocking. It is also conceivable to additionally or alternatively "gray out" the measurement protocol to indicate that it should no longer be edited. In a design scheme that suits the purpose, it is always possible, for example by selecting the measurement protocol, to observe the measurement protocol, specifically its protocol parameters, particularly in "read-only" mode. In this respect, the locking operating element thus provides enhanced safety in the event of accidental alteration.

[0029] One improvement that meets the objective is to end the suspension state and check readiness upon re-operation of the locking operation element. For this purpose, an unlocking operation element can also be provided. Thus, changes can be performed again on the user side, where, if the change involves input data for a potentially calculated check process and / or resolution process, i.e., its result, the check process and / or resolution process, i.e., its result, may be rejected. A design is also feasible in which, from the perspective of the measurement protocol in the suspension state, change continues, and upon making the change, the suspension state (and check readiness) is canceled; however, this is less preferred.

[0030] It should be noted that when the setup completion operation element is used to mark the inspection as ready, the inspection preparation can be terminated by re-invoking the measurement protocol in a manner appropriate to the purpose. After the setup completion operation element is manipulated again, the inspection preparation can be restored, at least when the relevant protocol parameters have not been changed, for example, the inspection process can continue and optionally the resolution process can be performed.

[0031] Therefore, it can generally be said that: if the protocol parameters used as input data during an already executed check change, the results of the check process to date should be rejected. That is, whenever the input data of the check process changes, its result should be rejected (and optionally the results of the subsequent resolution process should be rejected), and at least when the check preparation is re-established, the corresponding check process (and optionally the resolution process) should be re-executed.

[0032] In a particularly preferred embodiment of the invention, if the results of an already executed inspection process indicate the necessity of changing the associated measurement protocol or sequence of measurement protocols, then at least one resolution process is executed to obtain a resolution recommendation regarding the change, particularly while at least one additional measurement protocol has been set on the user side, and / or a prompt message indicating the necessity is displayed to the user in the user interface. As already mentioned, if necessary, the resolution process can also be implemented significantly earlier than invoking the measurement protocol for execution, particularly when the executionable inspection process fails while the measurement protocol is still in the waiting queue. Therefore, the implementation scheme for the inspection process can be similarly applied to the resolution process. In this respect, it is also desirable to prompt the user of the necessity of the change. Thus, the prompt message can, for example, indicate: there is a problem with the following measurement protocol and a resolution recommendation; the inspection for said measurement protocol has failed. Less preferably, if the resolution process has not been executed or the resolution process has not yet ended / is not yet executable, then the prompt message can also indicate that there is a problem in principle, thus indicating a violation of security requirements.

[0033] Upon reaching the destination, prompts can be output, at least partially in association with the corresponding measurement protocol, particularly adjacent to it, in a list-style diagram of the sequence of measurement protocols. These prompts can be shown, for example, at the location of the (and thus no longer exists) worker icon, or adjacent to the locking operation element. The list-style diagram of the measurement protocols ultimately reflects the waiting queue and is particularly suitable for highlighting measurement protocols requiring intervention.

[0034] By performing the check process (and optionally the resolution process) early, it is generally possible to inform the user in advance, through prompts, when a resolution suggestion or change requirement exists. The user can then react at a time they deem appropriate, even before the measurement protocol is executed. The user can review the proposed resolution suggestions and adopt at least one of them. However, it is also conceivable that the user makes manual adjustments so that the measurement protocol can be released for re-checking by the user making corresponding user input, particularly manipulating the locking or setting completion elements in the user interface. Thus, by performing at least the executable check process and optionally the resolution process, the control device of the MRI machine can re-check the measurement protocol in terms of safety requirements, and especially before the measurement protocol is retrieved from the waiting queue for execution, i.e., while the measurement protocol is still in the waiting queue.

[0035] In addition to the method described above, the present invention also relates to a magnetic resonance apparatus comprising: an operating device providing a user interface, particularly a graphical user interface, for setting a sequence of measurement protocols to be performed at the object being inspected during the inspection process; and a control device configured to execute the method according to the invention. All embodiments of the method according to the invention can be similarly adapted to the magnetic resonance apparatus according to the invention, and thus the advantages already mentioned can also be achieved by means of the magnetic resonance apparatus.

[0036] The control device can include at least one processor and at least one storage unit. Functional units can be formed by hardware and / or software to perform the steps of the method according to the invention. The control device can, for example, have a checking unit for checking a set measurement protocol in at least one inspection process in terms of compliance with at least one safety requirement relating to the inspected object and / or the magnetic resonance apparatus, wherein the measurement protocol is executed only if each of the at least one safety requirement is met. Furthermore, the control device can have a marking unit configured to mark a selected measurement protocol as inspection ready upon receiving an inspection ready signal, the inspection ready signal displaying user input describing the user's completion of setting the selected measurement protocol for the inspection process. Optionally, an executability unit for checking executability conditions can be provided. Particularly advantageously, a resource management unit is provided that triggers the specific execution of the inspection and resolution processes based on the satisfaction of corresponding availability conditions, particularly as long as the corresponding measurement protocol is in a waiting queue, i.e., has not yet been invoked for execution. Of course, at the latest upon invocation, any unfinished inspection processes are executed.

[0037] The user interface can be controlled via a user interaction unit of the control device, which in corresponding embodiments can also provide setting completion elements or locking elements and / or output prompt information. Other functional units for implementing the method according to the invention are also conceivable.

[0038] The computer program according to the invention can be directly loaded into the storage mechanism of the control device of the magnetic resonance apparatus and has a program mechanism such that when the computer program is executed on the control device, it causes the control device to perform the steps of the method according to the invention. The computer program can be stored on an electronically readable data carrier according to the invention, the data carrier therefore including control information stored thereon, the control information comprising at least one computer program according to the invention and designed such that when the data carrier is used in the control device of the magnetic resonance apparatus, the control information constitutes the means for performing the method according to the invention. The data carrier can in particular be a non-transient data carrier, such as a CD-ROM. Attached Figure Description

[0039] Other advantages and details of the invention will become apparent from the specific embodiments described below and from the accompanying drawings. Hereinafter:

[0040] Figure 1 A flowchart illustrating an embodiment of the method according to the present invention is shown;

[0041] Figure 2 This schematically illustrates a feasible design scheme for the user interface;

[0042] Figure 3 A schematic diagram of the magnetic resonance device according to the present invention is shown, and

[0043] Figure 4 The functional structure of the control device of the magnetic resonance device is shown. Detailed Implementation

[0044] Figure 1 A flowchart illustrating an embodiment of the method according to the invention is shown. The method is used in the operation of a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) apparatus, which, in addition to the commonly used components required for imaging, has control and operating devices for performing the method. The operating devices provide a user interface, see step S1, in which a sequence of measurement protocols for the examination process can be set. Step S1 in this case also includes processing user input on the control side and adjusting the user interface accordingly in response to the input, and further includes preparing to execute the measurement protocol during the examination process once it is the turn of the measurement protocol in the waiting queue.

[0045] Figure 2An exemplary design for the user interface is illustrated in the diagram. In the waiting queue area 2, a list is displayed showing which measurement protocols 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 have been selected for the inspection process, and which have been executed or are currently being executed. Available measurement protocols 9 can be pulled from the availability area 8, for example, into the waiting queue 10, i.e., into the list in the waiting queue area 2.

[0046] In the currently illustrated, purely exemplary state, measurement protocol 3 is already being executed, meaning the inspection process has begun. This is symbolized by the corresponding icon 11, such as a green dot. Selecting measurement protocol 4 allows it to be displayed in editing window 12 and optionally edited. Measurement protocol 4 is highlighted, making it identifiable that the content in editing window 12 pertains to it. Editing window 12 also includes a completion operation element 14, which confirms the end of editing or viewing, causing editing window 12 to close. Thus, for example, new measurement protocols 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 can be selected, and the content of the new editing window 12 pertains to those protocols. If measurement protocol 9 is pulled from availability zone 8 into waiting queue 10, then editing window 12 pertaining to measurement protocol 9 opens accordingly. The order of measurement protocols 4, 5, 6, and 7 that have not yet been executed can also be changed through appropriate actions.

[0047] In the embodiment described herein, each measurement protocol 4, 5, 6, 7, which is in the waiting queue 10—that is, not yet executed or being executed—is associated with both a locking operation element 15 and a status icon. The status icon can currently be an icon 16 indicating an editing state, such as a yellow "working" icon, or it can be an icon 17 indicating an aborted state, in which editing is not possible. The locking operation element 15, which can be identified, for example, by a lock, allows switching between the aborted and editing states.

[0048] Currently, when a user switches from edit mode to abort mode, the user, by manipulating the locking operation element 15, indicates that they intend not to change the corresponding measurement protocols 4, 5, 6, and 7. In this user input scenario, a check readiness signal is also generated, according to... Figure 1In step S2 of the method, it is checked whether the check readiness signal exists. If a check readiness signal exists for measurement protocols 4, 5, 6, and 7, then in step S3, measurement protocols 4, 5, 6, and 7 are marked as check ready, for example, by setting a flag. In step S2, it is also possible to monitor whether a termination signal indicating the termination of check readiness exists. Thus, in the specifically described embodiment, such a termination signal may be generated when switching back from the aborted state to the edit state.

[0049] Other embodiments are also conceivable, in which, for example, the locking operation element 15 is absent, and it is inferred from the manipulation of the setting completion operation element 14 that the setting of measurement protocols 4, 5, 6, and 7 in the waiting queue 10 has been completed, meaning the user intends not to change the measurement protocols further, thus generating a check readiness signal when the setting completion operation element 14 is manipulated. Therefore, a termination signal can be generated when the corresponding measurement protocols 4, 5, 6, and 7 are recalled in the editing window 12, or preferably when the protocol parameter 13 is actually changed.

[0050] Preparation for examination involves necessary checks on various safety requirements, which may relate to the object of examination (in this case, the patient) and / or the MRI device itself. These safety requirements may include, for example, the patient's permissible global and local SAR load, avoidance of nerve stimulation, the MRI device's technical specifications (amplifier performance for gradient coil and radio frequency coil devices, induced eddy currents, thermal load), and / or the impact on the patient's implants.

[0051] To measure whether protocols 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 meet the security requirements for inspection, an inspection process is performed. This inspection process currently includes, at least partially, a simulation of at least a portion of the measurement protocols, particularly a simulation of the magnetic resonance sequence included in the measurement protocols, thereby including a simulation of the output gradient pulses and radio frequency pulses. The inspection process does not necessarily have to form only the entire process for inspecting at least one security requirement, but can also be a sub-process of such an entire process. The sub-process, in particular, uses at least a portion of the protocol parameters (including protocol parameter 13) of at least the corresponding measurement protocols 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 as input data to obtain output data that directly describes the compliance or non-compliance of at least one security requirement, or is suitable for inspecting compliance with at least one security requirement. Typically, there are multiple inspection processes and multiple entire processes.

[0052] The inspection process, specifically, at least a part of the entire process, is associated with at least one resolution process. The entire process includes at least one inspection process, and the output data of the entire process shows whether at least one security requirement is followed or not followed. During the resolution process, a resolution recommendation is obtained as output data. This resolution recommendation involves changes to the corresponding measurement protocols 4, 5, 6, and 7 and / or changes to the sequence of measurement protocols 4, 5, 6, and 7 in the waiting queue 10 and / or changes to other measurement protocols 4, 5, 6, and 7 in the waiting queue 10. For the resolution recommendation, at least one currently violated security requirement, and ideally, all other security requirements, are satisfied. To this end, the resolution process can be performed iteratively, for example, by proposing a new set of protocol parameters and performing all inspection processes on the protocol parameter set until at least one currently violated security requirement, or preferably even all security requirements, are followed.

[0053] The inspection process may require at least partially input data, which exceeds the currently defined protocol parameters of the corresponding measurement protocols 4, 5, 6, and 7, which are inspection-ready (in... Figure 2 The parameters of measurement protocols 5 and 6 are, for example, parameters from other referenced measurement protocols 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and / or historical data arising from previous measurement protocols 3, 4, 5, 6, for example, in the thermal state of the SAR load and / or the magnetic resonance apparatus. Therefore, in step S4, for each inspection procedure, an executability condition is used to check whether the corresponding inspection procedure is executable. The executability condition at least indicates the presence of all input data required for the inspection procedure. To this end, when the selected measurement protocols 4, 5, 6, 7 refer to at least one other measurement protocol 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 of the sequence, and / or in the case of input data from at least one previous measurement protocol 3, 4, 5, 6 of the sequence, it is checked whether the other and / or previous measurement protocols 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 themselves have been marked as inspection-ready. When the inspection procedure is executable, the executability condition also applies to the solution procedure associated with the inspection procedure in order to determine the executability of the solution procedure.

[0054] In principle, it is now possible to directly execute all check processes (and optionally, resolve processes if checks fail). However, in this embodiment, each check process, preferably together with at least one associated resolve process, is associated with an availability condition specifically for the check process, indicating that the computing unit of the control device provides sufficient computing resources for the check process, and especially the resolve process, which are not required by more urgent, higher-priority processes. The availability condition is checked in step S5, and the associated, executable check process is executed in step S6 only if the corresponding availability condition is met. In other words, an intelligent resource management is implemented whereby the calculations for the check and resolve processes are only executed when computing time / resources are available on a suitable computing unit, especially on at least one protocol computer, and the more urgent, higher-priority processes do not require the computing time / resources. That is, idle time is utilized effectively.

[0055] It should be generally determined that the checking process is performed at least partially while the corresponding measurement protocols 4, 5, 6, and 7 are still in the waiting queue 10, i.e., before the measurement protocols are invoked for execution. In particular, the at least partial checking (and optionally, finding a solution) can be performed while other measurement protocols 4, 5, 6, and 7 are being set up.

[0056] Therefore, in step S7, it is checked whether the check process failed, i.e., whether the output data shows that at least one associated security requirement was not met. If at least one security requirement is met, then no further action is required; however, at least the output data is stored or displayed, for example, by a flag, as a result that measurement protocols 4, 5, 6, and 7 meet the corresponding security requirements. If (for clarity, this is not shown in the flowchart) a portion of the input data of a check process performed at a later time point, particularly protocol parameter 13, changes, then the result is rejected.

[0057] If at least one security requirement is violated, then in step S8, it is checked whether the associated resolution process is executable. If so, then in step S9, the resolution process is executed to obtain a solution suggestion. Even if the resolution process should not be executable, in step S10, the following prompt message is output: Security requirements not met and editing is required. Currently (see...) Figure 2 The prompt message is also displayed at least via prompt icon 18 in a list-style diagram of waiting queue 10, in accordance with the corresponding measurement protocols 4, 5, 6, and 7 (in...). Figure 2The output is exemplarily associated with measurement protocol 6. Therefore, if the corresponding measurement protocol 6 is selected during the ongoing activity of step S1, then (if present) a corresponding solution suggestion is output, and the user can either accept the solution suggestion or change the protocol parameter 13 themselves. All of this can be done while the corresponding measurement protocol 6 is still in the waiting queue.

[0058] It should be understood that any pending checks and optional resolution processes will not be executed until it is time to execute the corresponding measurement protocols 4, 5, 6, and 7, i.e., when the protocol leaves the waiting queue. In other words, the measurement protocol will be marked as check-ready no later than this point.

[0059] Figure 3 An embodiment of a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) device 19 according to the invention is schematically shown. As is known in principle, the MRI device 19 includes a main magnet unit 20 having a pre-cylindrical patient reception portion 21 into which a patient can be moved for examination via an examination table (not shown in detail). The main magnet unit 20 also includes a particularly superconducting main magnet that generates a main magnetic field. The MRI device 19 also includes gradient coil arrangements and radio frequency (RF) coil arrangements surrounding the patient reception portion 21, the RF coil arrangements potentially including portions surrounding the patient reception portion 21, but also potentially including local coils. For generating gradient pulses and RF pulses, the respective coil arrangements are equipped with amplifiers.

[0060] The magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) device 19 also includes an operating device 22, which may include a display device 23 and an input device 24, such as a keyboard and / or a mouse. The operating device 22 may be located at least partially outside the shielded chamber, while the main magnet unit 20 is located inside the shielded chamber.

[0061] The operation of the magnetic resonance device 19 is controlled by a control device 25, which is also configured to perform the method according to the invention. The control device 25 may include multiple computing units 32, particularly processors.

[0062] Figure 4 The diagram illustrates at least the functional structure of the control device 25 in relation to performing the method according to the invention. The control device 25 firstly has a storage mechanism 26 capable of storing different types of information, such as information for performing inspection processes, resolution processes, and other calculation processes / procedures and / or their results and protocol parameters.

[0063] According to step S1, the user interface 1 is controlled by the user interaction unit 27 of the control device 25. In this case, the user interaction unit 27 also controls the operation of the user interface 1, and also includes providing a lock operation element 15 and a setting completion operation element 14. The user interaction unit 27 is also configured to output prompt information 18 according to step S10.

[0064] The control device 25 further includes a checking unit 28, which is used to check, during at least one checking process, whether at least one safety requirement relating to the object under inspection and / or the magnetic resonance device 19 is met, according to a set measurement protocol 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, wherein measurement protocol 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 is executed only if each of the at least one safety requirement is met. The checking unit 28 is also capable of executing at least one corresponding resolution procedure in the event of a checking failure. That is, the checking unit 28 is specifically configured to execute steps S6, S7, S8, and S9.

[0065] Upon receiving a check readiness signal, the selected measurement protocols 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 can be marked as check ready in the marking unit 29, thereby constituting the execution of steps S2 and S3. The check readiness signal displays the user input that has been performed, and the user input describes the user's completion of setting the selected measurement protocols 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 for the check process. The control device 25 also includes an executability unit 30 for checking executability conditions according to step S4, and a resource management unit 31. The resource management unit 31 triggers the specific execution of the check process and the resolution process according to step S5 based on whether the corresponding availability conditions are met, specifically as long as the corresponding measurement protocols 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 are in the waiting queue 10, i.e., have not yet been invoked for execution, the specific execution is triggered.

[0066] Of course, other functional units can also be included.

[0067] In this patent application, nouns and pronouns referring to people generally do not specify a particular gender.

Claims

1. A computer-implemented method for operating a magnetic resonance imaging apparatus (19), the magnetic resonance apparatus (19) comprising an operating device (22) providing a user interface (1), particularly a graphical user interface, the user interface (1) for setting a sequence of measurement protocols (3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9) to be performed at the object being inspected during an inspection process, wherein the set measurement protocols (3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9) are checked in at least one inspection process for compliance with at least one safety requirement relating to the object being inspected and / or the magnetic resonance apparatus (19), and are performed only if each of the at least one safety requirement is met. Its features are, Upon receiving an inspection ready signal, the selected measurement protocol (3, 4, 5, 6, 7) is marked as inspection ready. The inspection ready signal indicates user input that has been performed, describing the user's completion of setting the selected measurement protocol (3, 4, 5, 6, 7) for the inspection process. This ensures that at least one executable inspection process in the at least one inspection process is already executable and / or executed before the measurement protocol (3, 4, 5, 6, 7) is turned in sequence for execution during the inspection process, particularly during the user's setting of at least one additional measurement protocol (3, 4, 5, 6, 7).

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The executability conditions are checked to determine the executability of the corresponding inspection process, and the executability conditions at least show the existence of all the input data required for the inspection process.

3. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that, In the case of the selected measurement protocol (3, 4, 5, 6, 7) referencing at least one other measurement protocol (3, 4, 5, 6, 7) of the sequence, and / or in the case of the input data of at least one previous measurement protocol (3, 4, 5, 6, 7) of the sequence, the executability condition check is performed to determine whether the other measurement protocol (3, 4, 5, 6, 7) and / or the previous measurement protocol (3, 4, 5, 6, 7) itself has been marked as ready for inspection.

4. The method according to any one of the preceding claims, characterized in that, - Either execute all executable checks if the check is marked as ready, - Either assess availability conditions based on load rate information describing the load rate of at least one computing unit (32) of the magnetic resonance device (19), particularly availability conditions specific to the corresponding executable inspection process, which indicate the presence of sufficient idle computing resources, and execute the executable inspection process when the availability conditions are met.

5. The method according to claim 4, characterized in that, Priorities are used when allocating computing resources, wherein the inspection process is associated with a lower priority than at least one computing process involving the user interface (1), especially with any other computing process used to set up and / or prepare the inspection process, and / or with at least one computing process used to execute the measurement protocol (3, 4, 5, 6, 7), especially with any other computing process used to execute the measurement protocol (3, 4, 5, 6, 7).

6. The method according to any one of the preceding claims, characterized in that, The inspection readiness signal is generated in the diagram for setting the selected measurement protocol (3, 4, 5, 6, 7) when the setting completion operation element (14) of the user interface (1) is manipulated.

7. The method according to any one of claims 1 to 6, characterized in that, The inspection readiness signal is generated when the locking operation element (15) is manipulated, which causes the change of the selected measurement protocol (3, 4, 5, 6, 7) to be aborted.

8. The method according to any one of the preceding claims, characterized in that, If the protocol parameters used as input data are changed during an already performed check, the results of the check process to date are rejected.

9. The method according to any one of the preceding claims, characterized in that, If the results of the already performed inspection process indicate the necessity to change the associated measurement protocol (3, 4, 5, 6, 7) or the sequence of said measurement protocols (3, 4, 5, 6, 7), then at least one resolution process is performed to obtain a resolution recommendation for making the change, especially if it has already been performed during the setting of at least one additional measurement protocol (3, 4, 5, 6, 7) on the user side, and / or a prompt message (18) showing the necessity is output to the user in the user interface (1).

10. The method according to claim 9, characterized in that, The prompt information (18) is output at least in part in a list-style illustration of the measurement protocols (3, 4, 5, 6, 7) of the sequence, and especially adjacent to the corresponding measurement protocol (3, 4, 5, 6, 7).

11. The method according to any one of the preceding claims, characterized in that, At least one of the at least one examination process involves: the SAR load of the examined object; and / or the neural load of the examined object; and / or the suitability of the field and field distribution for the implant of the examined object; and / or the guarantee of the image quality sought in the examination process; and / or compliance with at least one technical specification of the magnetic resonance device (19), especially with respect to the gradient coil device and / or the radio frequency coil device and / or the amplifier device; and / or the thermal performance of the magnetic resonance device (19).

12. The method according to any one of the preceding claims, characterized in that, At least one inspection process involves a sub-process of the entire process, which can be executed independently of the rest of the entire process.

13. A magnetic resonance apparatus (19) comprising: an operating device (22) providing a user interface (1), particularly a graphical user interface, the user interface (1) for setting a sequence of measurement protocols (3, 4, 5, 6, 7) to be performed at the object to be inspected during the inspection process; and a control device (25) configured to perform the method according to any one of the preceding claims.

14. A computer program, when executed on a control device (25) of a magnetic resonance apparatus (19), causes the control device to perform the steps of the method according to any one of claims 1 to 12.

15. An electronically readable data carrier on which a computer program according to claim 14 is stored.

Images