• Something wrong with this record ?

Assessment of MR stereotactic imaging and image co-registration accuracy for 3 different MR scanners by 3 different methods/phantoms: phantom and patient study

V. Paštyková, J. Novotný, T. Veselský, D. Urgošík, R. Liščák, J. Vymazal,

. 2018 ; 129 (Suppl1) : 125-132. [pub] 20181201

Language English Country United States

Document type Evaluation Study, Journal Article

OBJECTIVEThe aim of this study was to compare 3 different methods to assess the geometrical distortion of two 1.5-T and one 3-T magnetic resonance (MR) scanners and to evaluate co-registration accuracy. The overall uncertainty of each particular method was also evaluated.METHODSThree different MR phantoms were used: 2 commercial CIRS skull phantoms and PTGR known target phantom and 1 custom cylindrical Perspex phantom made in-house. All phantoms were fixed in the Leksell stereotactic frame and examined by a Siemens Somatom CT unit, two 1.5-T Siemens (Avanto and Symphony) MRI systems, and one 3-T Siemens (Skyra) MRI system. The images were evaluated using Leksell GammaPlan software, and geometrical deviation of the selected points from the reference values were determined. The deviations were further investigated for both definitions including fiducial-based and co-registration-based in the case of the CIRS phantom images. The same co-registration accuracy assessment was also performed for a clinical case. Patient stereotactic imaging was done on 3-T Skyra, 1.5-T Avanto, and CT scanners.RESULTSThe accuracy of the CT scanner was determined as 0.10, 0.30, and 0.30 mm for X, Y, and Z coordinates, respectively. The total estimated uncertainty in distortion measurement in one coordinate was determined to be 0.32 mm and 0.14 mm, respectively, for methods using and not using CT as reference imaging. Slightly more significant distortions were observed when using the 3-T than either 1.5-T MR units. However, all scanners were comparable within the estimated measurement error. Observed deviation/distortion for individual X, Y, and Z stereotactic coordinates was typically within 0.50 mm for all 3 scanners and all 3 measurement methods employed. The total radial deviation/distortion was typically within 1.00 mm. Maximum total radial distortion was observed when the CIRS phantom was used; 1.08 ± 0.49 mm, 1.15 ± 0.48 mm, and 1.35 ± 0.49 mm for Symphony, Avanto, and Skyra, respectively. The co-registration process improved image stereotactic definition in a clinical case in which fiducial-based stereotactic definition was not accurate; this was demonstrated for 3-T stereotactic imaging in this study. The best results were shown for 3-T MR image co-registration with CT images improving image stereotactic definition by about 0.50 mm. The results obtained with patient data provided a similar trend of improvement in stereotactic definition by co-registration.CONCLUSIONSAll 3 methods/phantoms used were evaluated as satisfactory for the image distortion measurement. The method using the PTGR phantom had the lowest uncertainty as no reference CT imaging was needed. Image co-registration can improve stereotactic image definition when fiducial-based definition is not accurate.

References provided by Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc19034863
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20191015095550.0
007      
ta
008      
191007s2018 xxu f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.3171/2018.7.GKS181527 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)30544292
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxu
100    1_
$a Paštyková, Veronika $u Departments of1Medical Physics.
245    10
$a Assessment of MR stereotactic imaging and image co-registration accuracy for 3 different MR scanners by 3 different methods/phantoms: phantom and patient study / $c V. Paštyková, J. Novotný, T. Veselský, D. Urgošík, R. Liščák, J. Vymazal,
520    9_
$a OBJECTIVEThe aim of this study was to compare 3 different methods to assess the geometrical distortion of two 1.5-T and one 3-T magnetic resonance (MR) scanners and to evaluate co-registration accuracy. The overall uncertainty of each particular method was also evaluated.METHODSThree different MR phantoms were used: 2 commercial CIRS skull phantoms and PTGR known target phantom and 1 custom cylindrical Perspex phantom made in-house. All phantoms were fixed in the Leksell stereotactic frame and examined by a Siemens Somatom CT unit, two 1.5-T Siemens (Avanto and Symphony) MRI systems, and one 3-T Siemens (Skyra) MRI system. The images were evaluated using Leksell GammaPlan software, and geometrical deviation of the selected points from the reference values were determined. The deviations were further investigated for both definitions including fiducial-based and co-registration-based in the case of the CIRS phantom images. The same co-registration accuracy assessment was also performed for a clinical case. Patient stereotactic imaging was done on 3-T Skyra, 1.5-T Avanto, and CT scanners.RESULTSThe accuracy of the CT scanner was determined as 0.10, 0.30, and 0.30 mm for X, Y, and Z coordinates, respectively. The total estimated uncertainty in distortion measurement in one coordinate was determined to be 0.32 mm and 0.14 mm, respectively, for methods using and not using CT as reference imaging. Slightly more significant distortions were observed when using the 3-T than either 1.5-T MR units. However, all scanners were comparable within the estimated measurement error. Observed deviation/distortion for individual X, Y, and Z stereotactic coordinates was typically within 0.50 mm for all 3 scanners and all 3 measurement methods employed. The total radial deviation/distortion was typically within 1.00 mm. Maximum total radial distortion was observed when the CIRS phantom was used; 1.08 ± 0.49 mm, 1.15 ± 0.48 mm, and 1.35 ± 0.49 mm for Symphony, Avanto, and Skyra, respectively. The co-registration process improved image stereotactic definition in a clinical case in which fiducial-based stereotactic definition was not accurate; this was demonstrated for 3-T stereotactic imaging in this study. The best results were shown for 3-T MR image co-registration with CT images improving image stereotactic definition by about 0.50 mm. The results obtained with patient data provided a similar trend of improvement in stereotactic definition by co-registration.CONCLUSIONSAll 3 methods/phantoms used were evaluated as satisfactory for the image distortion measurement. The method using the PTGR phantom had the lowest uncertainty as no reference CT imaging was needed. Image co-registration can improve stereotactic image definition when fiducial-based definition is not accurate.
650    _2
$a artefakty $7 D016477
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a počítačové zpracování obrazu $7 D007091
650    _2
$a magnetická rezonanční tomografie $x přístrojové vybavení $x metody $7 D008279
650    _2
$a anatomické modely $7 D008953
650    12
$a fantomy radiodiagnostické $7 D019047
650    _2
$a reprodukovatelnost výsledků $7 D015203
650    _2
$a lebka $7 D012886
650    _2
$a software $7 D012984
650    12
$a stereotaktické techniky $x přístrojové vybavení $7 D013238
650    _2
$a počítačová rentgenová tomografie $7 D014057
655    _2
$a hodnotící studie $7 D023362
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Novotný, Josef $u Departments of1Medical Physics.
700    1_
$a Veselský, Tomáš $u Departments of1Medical Physics.
700    1_
$a Urgošík, Dušan $u 2Stereotactic and Radiation Neurosurgery, and.
700    1_
$a Liščák, Roman $u 2Stereotactic and Radiation Neurosurgery, and.
700    1_
$a Vymazal, Josef $u 3Radiodiagnostics, Na Homolce Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic.
773    0_
$w MED00002843 $t Journal of neurosurgery $x 1933-0693 $g Roč. 129, Suppl1 (2018), s. 125-132
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30544292 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
990    __
$a 20191007 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20191015100015 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1451523 $s 1073413
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2018 $b 129 $c Suppl1 $d 125-132 $e 20181201 $i 1933-0693 $m Journal of neurosurgery $n J Neurosurg $x MED00002843
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20191007

Find record

Citation metrics

Loading data ...

Archiving options

Loading data ...