2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2016.01.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Characterization of 3D geometric distortion of magnetic resonance imaging scanners commissioned for radiation therapy planning

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

8
96
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 58 publications
(105 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
8
96
1
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, a recent study using an MR phantom found that 3D correction was superior to 2D-only correction. The authors also made the important observation that 3D correction actually also improves the in-plane slice accuracy over 2D-only algorithms because the 2D algorithms depend on the estimated 3D distance from isocenter to calculate distortion effect [25]. Another phantom study found that 2D-only correction merely reduced maximal distortion in their experimental conditions from 3.4 mm to 3.2 mm, numbers that are quite similar to those reported in the present work [9].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 80%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For example, a recent study using an MR phantom found that 3D correction was superior to 2D-only correction. The authors also made the important observation that 3D correction actually also improves the in-plane slice accuracy over 2D-only algorithms because the 2D algorithms depend on the estimated 3D distance from isocenter to calculate distortion effect [25]. Another phantom study found that 2D-only correction merely reduced maximal distortion in their experimental conditions from 3.4 mm to 3.2 mm, numbers that are quite similar to those reported in the present work [9].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 80%
“…Gradient non-linearity distortion has been reported to increase with distance from the center of the magnetic field [9, 12, 13, 22, 25]. To investigate this effect in our own data, we calculated the Euclidean distance (in 3D) of the center of mass of the true, corrected GTV from the magnet isocenter.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some new large geometric phantoms are being developed to simulate and evaluate distortion with large FOV 21, 22. The magnitude of the distortions increases with increasing distance from the isocenter of the scanner 23, 24. Similar to our results, within a distance of 200 mm, the mean distortion in the axial plane can be controlled in an acceptable range for radiotherapy.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 81%
“…An in‐house Java‐based software module described in our previous work18 was used for automating the assessment of the geometric distortion. This module calculates the coordinates of each control point by measuring the center of mass (COM), then the algorithm corrects for gross phantom misalignment errors (translational and rotational errors), and finally establishes a one‐to‐one correspondence between the corrected control points in the MRI datasets and known positions obtained from the CT gold standard control points (Fig.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, tests conducted in order to evaluate 3D geometric accuracy as well as blurring artifact of balanced steady‐state gradient echo Cine MR Pulse sequence used with respiratory motion are described. This evaluation is performed using a point‐based phantom covering a 300 × 200 × 400 mm 3 Field Of View (FOV) 18. The geometric accuracy and the blurring artifact were evaluated for sequences acquired in the axial, sagittal, and coronal planes.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%