# MPRAGE vs multi-echo FLASH

**URL:** <https://mne.discourse.group/t/mprage-vs-multi-echo-flash/1695>\
**Category:** Mailing List Archive (read-only)\
**Tags:** list-archive\
**Created:** [December 29, 2018, 6:20pm UTC](https://mne.discourse.group/t/mprage-vs-multi-echo-flash/1695 "2018-12-29T18:20:44Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 4\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/free1/uploads/mne/original/1X/85cc6bd2b69cb698a166dc6d880fb550510d0144.jpeg) [@system](https://mne.discourse.group/u/system)\
**Post date:** [December 29, 2018, 6:20pm UTC](https://mne.discourse.group/t/mprage-vs-multi-echo-flash/1695/1 "2018-12-29T18:20:44Z")

</div>

External Email - Use Caution

Hi everyone,

I am looking for some references and advice on differences between MPRAGE  
and multi-echo FLASH MRI sequences. My understanding is that both are  
useful for EEG source reconstruction because FLASH is better at  
reconstructing skull boundaries and MPRANGE is better at reconstructing the  
cortex, but I couldn't find any particular info on that, so please correct  
me if I'm wrong.

And a follow-up question: I undrestand that it is best to have both MPRANGE  
and FLASH images, but if one had to pick just one which would be better  
overall for EEG source reconstruction?

thanks,  
Miko?aj Magnuski

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/free1/uploads/mne/original/1X/85cc6bd2b69cb698a166dc6d880fb550510d0144.jpeg) [@system](https://mne.discourse.group/u/system)\
**Post date:** [December 30, 2018, 11:09am UTC](https://mne.discourse.group/t/mprage-vs-multi-echo-flash/1695/2 "2018-12-30T11:09:00Z")

</div>

External Email - Use Caution

Hi Miko?aj,

a proper T1 MPRAGE is mandatory to segment the cortex and to see over which  
region in the brain you have activation.

the Flash images are a bonus if you want to have a fine segmentation  
of the skull  
surface for more accurate forward modeling.

HTH  
Alex

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/free1/uploads/mne/original/1X/85cc6bd2b69cb698a166dc6d880fb550510d0144.jpeg) [@system](https://mne.discourse.group/u/system)\
**Post date:** [December 31, 2018, 5:05pm UTC](https://mne.discourse.group/t/mprage-vs-multi-echo-flash/1695/3 "2018-12-31T17:05:55Z")

</div>

External Email - Use Caution

Thanks Alex,

I am also looking for some references or opinions with respect to the gain  
in source localization accuracy/correctness when adding FLASH to normal T1  
MPRAGE. Especially if one has only EEG with a modest number of channels  
(64). I am wondering if adding FLASH, which is much longer than MPRAGE,  
does make a noticeable difference in such a scenario.  
Any suggestions and opinions would be greatly welcome.

Miko?aj

niedz., 30 gru 2018 o 12:09 Alexandre Gramfort \<alexandre.gramfort at [inria.fr](http://inria.fr)\>  
napisa?(a):

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/free1/uploads/mne/original/1X/85cc6bd2b69cb698a166dc6d880fb550510d0144.jpeg) [@system](https://mne.discourse.group/u/system)\
**Post date:** [January 6, 2019, 5:22pm UTC](https://mne.discourse.group/t/mprage-vs-multi-echo-flash/1695/4 "2019-01-06T17:22:57Z")

</div>

External Email - Use Caution

I would do the simulation myself using sample dataset for which you  
have a watershed and a flash bem model you can use.

You simulate with flash bem and do dipole fits using watershed bem and  
you see what is the histogram of localization errors.

Alex