2016
DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20160108
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessment of a carbon fibre MRI flatbed insert for radiotherapy treatment planning

Abstract: This study suggests that carbon fibre is less suitable for large-scale MRI applications owing to it causing severe RF shading. Further research is needed to establish the suitability of the flatbed for treatment planning using alternative sequences or whether an alternative carbon fibre composite for large-scale MRI applications or a design that can minimize shielding can be found.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
22
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
(16 reference statements)
0
22
0
Order By: Relevance
“…MR scanner, yielding a reduction in SNR and uniformity 87 as well as a risk of thermal injury to the patient, thus should be avoided.…”
Section: Accepted Articlementioning
confidence: 99%
“…MR scanner, yielding a reduction in SNR and uniformity 87 as well as a risk of thermal injury to the patient, thus should be avoided.…”
Section: Accepted Articlementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The RFinduced heating effect of an in-house carbon fiber flatbed for a 3T MRI scanner was evaluated by using 2 different thermometry techniques. 55 Minimal temperature increases (<0.2 C) were observed as demonstrated by the temperatureetime profiles measured for 3 different imaging sequences. However, severe shading image artifacts were evident on both phantom and patient images caused by the magnetic susceptibility difference of the carbon fiber couch top.…”
Section: Immobilization and Accessory Devicesmentioning
confidence: 84%
“…This can cause image distortion and localised heating as a result of eddy currents. In consequence, carbon fibre boards are not used in MRI systems [3]. The test samples were placed directly underneath a test object and imaging performed.…”
Section: Medical Imaging Compatibility Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 99%