skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: SU-F-J-143: Initial Assessment of Image Quality of An Integrated MR-Linac System with ACR Phantom

Abstract

Purpose/Objective(s): To assess the image quality of an integrated MR-Linac system and compare with other MRI systems that are primarily used for diagnostic purposes. Materials/Methods: An ACR MRI quality control (QC) phantom was used to evaluate the image quality of a fully integrated 1.5T MRI-Linac system recently installed at our institution. This system has a new split magnet design which gives the magnetic field strength of 1.5T. All images were acquired with a set of phased-array surface coils which are designed to have minimal attention of radiation beam. The anterior coil rests on a coil holder which keeps the anterior coil’s position consistent for QA purposes. The posterior coil is imbedded in the patient couch. Multiple sets of T1, T2/PD images were acquired using the protocols as prescribed by the ACR on three different dates, ranging 3 months apart. Results: The geometric distortion are within 0.5 mm in the axial scans and within 1mm in the saggital (z-direction) scans. Slice thickness accuracy, image uniformity, ghosting ratio, high contrast detectability are comparable to other 1.5T diagnostic MRI scanners. The low-contrast object detectability are lower comparatively, which is a result of using the body array coil. Additionally, the beam’s-eye-view images (oblique coronalmore » and saggital images) have minimal geometric distortion at all linac gantry angles tested. No observable changes or drift in image quality is found from images acquired 3 month apart. Conclusion: Despite the use of a body array surface coil, the image quality is comparable to that of an 1.5T MRI scanner and is of sufficient quality to pass the ACR MRI accreditation program. The geometric distortion of the MRI system of the integrated MR-Linac is within 1mm for an object size similar to the ACR phantom, sufficient for radiation therapy treatment purpose. The authors received corporate sponsored research grants from Elekta which is the vendor for the MR-Linac evaluated in this study.« less

Authors:
;  [1]; ; ; ;  [2]
  1. MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX (United States)
  2. UT MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX (United States)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22634746
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 43; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2016 American Association of Physicists in Medicine; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES; 61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY; ACCURACY; IMAGES; LINEAR ACCELERATORS; MAGNETIC FIELDS; NMR IMAGING; PHANTOMS; QUALITY CONTROL; RADIOTHERAPY; THICKNESS

Citation Formats

Wang, J, Fuller, C, Yung, J, Kadbi, M, Ding, Y, and Ibbott, G. SU-F-J-143: Initial Assessment of Image Quality of An Integrated MR-Linac System with ACR Phantom. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4956051.
Wang, J, Fuller, C, Yung, J, Kadbi, M, Ding, Y, & Ibbott, G. SU-F-J-143: Initial Assessment of Image Quality of An Integrated MR-Linac System with ACR Phantom. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956051.
Wang, J, Fuller, C, Yung, J, Kadbi, M, Ding, Y, and Ibbott, G. 2016. "SU-F-J-143: Initial Assessment of Image Quality of An Integrated MR-Linac System with ACR Phantom". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956051.
@article{osti_22634746,
title = {SU-F-J-143: Initial Assessment of Image Quality of An Integrated MR-Linac System with ACR Phantom},
author = {Wang, J and Fuller, C and Yung, J and Kadbi, M and Ding, Y and Ibbott, G},
abstractNote = {Purpose/Objective(s): To assess the image quality of an integrated MR-Linac system and compare with other MRI systems that are primarily used for diagnostic purposes. Materials/Methods: An ACR MRI quality control (QC) phantom was used to evaluate the image quality of a fully integrated 1.5T MRI-Linac system recently installed at our institution. This system has a new split magnet design which gives the magnetic field strength of 1.5T. All images were acquired with a set of phased-array surface coils which are designed to have minimal attention of radiation beam. The anterior coil rests on a coil holder which keeps the anterior coil’s position consistent for QA purposes. The posterior coil is imbedded in the patient couch. Multiple sets of T1, T2/PD images were acquired using the protocols as prescribed by the ACR on three different dates, ranging 3 months apart. Results: The geometric distortion are within 0.5 mm in the axial scans and within 1mm in the saggital (z-direction) scans. Slice thickness accuracy, image uniformity, ghosting ratio, high contrast detectability are comparable to other 1.5T diagnostic MRI scanners. The low-contrast object detectability are lower comparatively, which is a result of using the body array coil. Additionally, the beam’s-eye-view images (oblique coronal and saggital images) have minimal geometric distortion at all linac gantry angles tested. No observable changes or drift in image quality is found from images acquired 3 month apart. Conclusion: Despite the use of a body array surface coil, the image quality is comparable to that of an 1.5T MRI scanner and is of sufficient quality to pass the ACR MRI accreditation program. The geometric distortion of the MRI system of the integrated MR-Linac is within 1mm for an object size similar to the ACR phantom, sufficient for radiation therapy treatment purpose. The authors received corporate sponsored research grants from Elekta which is the vendor for the MR-Linac evaluated in this study.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4956051},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 43,
place = {United States},
year = 2016,
month = 6
}
  • The goal of the study was to evaluate the first CR digital mammography system ( registered Konica-Minolta) in Mexico in clinical routine for cancer detection in a screening population and to determine if high resolution CR digital imaging is equivalent to state-of-the-art screen-film imaging. The mammograms were evaluated by two observers with cytological or histological confirmation for BIRADS 3, 4 and 5. Contrast, exposure and artifacts of the images were evaluated. Different details like skin, retromamillary space and parenchymal structures were judged. The detectability of microcalcifications and lesions were compared and correlated to histology. The difference in sensitivity of CRmore » Mammography (CRM) and Screen Film Mammography (SFM) was not statistically significant. However, CRM had a significantly lower recall rate, and the lesion detection was equal or superior to conventional images. There is no significant difference in the number of microcalcifications and highly suspicious calcifications were equally detected on both film-screen and digital images. Different anatomical regions were better detectable in digital than in conventional mammography.« less
  • Purpose: In a large, academic medical center, consistent radiographic imaging performance is difficult to routinely monitor and maintain, especially for a fleet consisting of multiple vendors, models, software versions, and numerous imaging protocols. Thus, an automated image quality control methodology has been implemented using routine image quality assessment with a physical, stylized anthropomorphic chest phantom. Methods: The “Duke” Phantom (Digital Phantom 07-646, Supertech, Elkhart, IN) was imaged twice on each of 13 radiographic units from a variety of vendors at 13 primary care clinics. The first acquisition used the clinical PA chest protocol to acquire the post-processed “FOR PRESENTATION” image.more » The second image was acquired without an antiscatter grid followed by collection of the “FOR PROCESSING” image. Manual CNR measurements were made from the largest and thickest contrast-detail inserts in the lung, heart, and abdominal regions of the phantom in each image. An automated image registration algorithm was used to estimate the CNR of the same insert using similar ROIs. Automated measurements were then compared to the manual measurements. Results: Automatic and manual CNR measurements obtained from “FOR PRESENTATION” images had average percent differences of 0.42%±5.18%, −3.44%±4.85%, and 1.04%±3.15% in the lung, heart, and abdominal regions, respectively; measurements obtained from “FOR PROCESSING” images had average percent differences of -0.63%±6.66%, −0.97%±3.92%, and −0.53%±4.18%, respectively. The maximum absolute difference in CNR was 15.78%, 10.89%, and 8.73% in the respective regions. In addition to CNR assessment of the largest and thickest contrast-detail inserts, the automated method also provided CNR estimates for all 75 contrast-detail inserts in each phantom image. Conclusion: Automated analysis of a radiographic phantom has been shown to be a fast, robust, and objective means for assessing radiographic image quality. The method reduces the burden of manual measurements and provides a means by which to monitor and compare radiographic system performance.« less
  • Purpose: Integrated positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance (PET/MR) systems derive the PET attenuation correction (AC) from dedicated MR sequences. While MR-AC performs reasonably well in clinical patient imaging, it may fail for phantom-based quality control (QC). The authors assess the applicability of different protocols for PET QC in multicenter PET/MR imaging. Methods: The National Electrical Manufacturers Association NU 2 2007 image quality phantom was imaged on three combined PET/MR systems: a Philips Ingenuity TF PET/MR, a Siemens Biograph mMR, and a GE SIGNA PET/MR (prototype) system. The phantom was filled according to the EANM FDG-PET/CT guideline 1.0 and scanned for 5more » min over 1 bed. Two MR-AC imaging protocols were tested: standard clinical procedures and a dedicated protocol for phantom tests. Depending on the system, the dedicated phantom protocol employs a two-class (water and air) segmentation of the MR data or a CT-based template. Differences in attenuation- and SUV recovery coefficients (RC) are reported. PET/CT-based simulations were performed to simulate the various artifacts seen in the AC maps (μ-map) and their impact on the accuracy of phantom-based QC. Results: Clinical MR-AC protocols caused substantial errors and artifacts in the AC maps, resulting in underestimations of the reconstructed PET activity of up to 27%, depending on the PET/MR system. Using dedicated phantom MR-AC protocols, PET bias was reduced to −8%. Mean and max SUV RC met EARL multicenter PET performance specifications for most contrast objects, but only when using the dedicated phantom protocol. Simulations confirmed the bias in experimental data to be caused by incorrect AC maps resulting from the use of clinical MR-AC protocols. Conclusions: Phantom-based quality control of PET/MR systems in a multicenter, multivendor setting may be performed with sufficient accuracy, but only when dedicated phantom acquisition and processing protocols are used for attenuation correction.« less
  • Image quality and radiation dose of a direct amorphous selenium digital mammography system were considered in terms of contrast to noise ratio (CNR) and average glandular dose (AGD). They were measured for various qualities and breast phantom thicknesses with different types of breast tissue composition to determine optimal radiation quality and dose. Three sets of breast tissue equivalent slabs (30%:70%, 50%:50% and 70%:30% glandular-adipose) with thickness of 2 cm to 7 cm and 0.2 mm aluminum foil were used to provide certain CNR. Two different combinations of anode/ilter material and a wide range of tube voltages were employed for eachmore » phantom thickness. Phantom images with grid were acquired using automatic exposure control (AEC) mode for each thickness. Phantom images without grid were also obtained in manual exposure mode by selecting the same anode/filter combination and kVp as the image obtained with grid at the same thickness, but varying mAs of 10 to 200 mAs. Optimization indicated that relatively high energy beam qualities should be used with a greater dose to compensate for lower energy x-rays. The results also indicate that current AEC setting for a fixed detector is not optimal.« less