Cargando…

Determining the longitudinal accuracy and reproducibility of T(1) and T(2) in a 3T MRI scanner

PURPOSE: To determine baseline accuracy and reproducibility of T(1) and T(2) relaxation times over 12 months on a dedicated radiotherapy MRI scanner. METHODS: An International Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine/National Institute of Standards and Technology (ISMRM/NIST) System Phantom was sca...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Carr, Madeline E., Keenan, Kathryn E., Rai, Robba, Metcalfe, Peter, Walker, Amy, Holloway, Lois
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8598150/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34562341
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13432
_version_ 1784600753257578496
author Carr, Madeline E.
Keenan, Kathryn E.
Rai, Robba
Metcalfe, Peter
Walker, Amy
Holloway, Lois
author_facet Carr, Madeline E.
Keenan, Kathryn E.
Rai, Robba
Metcalfe, Peter
Walker, Amy
Holloway, Lois
author_sort Carr, Madeline E.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To determine baseline accuracy and reproducibility of T(1) and T(2) relaxation times over 12 months on a dedicated radiotherapy MRI scanner. METHODS: An International Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine/National Institute of Standards and Technology (ISMRM/NIST) System Phantom was scanned monthly on a 3T MRI scanner for 1 year. T(1) was measured using inversion recovery (T(1)‐IR) and variable flip angle (T(1)‐VFA) sequences and T(2) was measured using a multi‐echo spin echo (T(2)‐SE) sequence. For each vial in the phantom, accuracy errors (%bias) were determined by the relative differences in measured T(1) and T(2) times compared to reference values. Reproducibility was measured by the coefficient of variation (CV) of T(1) and T(2) measurements across monthly scans. Accuracy and reproducibility were mainly assessed on vials with relaxation times expected to be in physiological ranges at 3T. RESULTS: A strong linear correlation between measured and reference relaxation times was found for all sequences tested (R (2 )> 0.997). Baseline bias (and CV[%]) for T(1)‐IR, T(1)‐VFA and T(2)‐SE sequences were +2.0% (2.1), +6.5% (4.2), and +8.5% (1.9), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy and reproducibility of T(1) and T(2) on the scanner were considered sufficient for the sequences tested. No longitudinal trends of variation were deduced, suggesting less frequent measurements are required following the establishment of baselines.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8598150
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85981502021-12-02 Determining the longitudinal accuracy and reproducibility of T(1) and T(2) in a 3T MRI scanner Carr, Madeline E. Keenan, Kathryn E. Rai, Robba Metcalfe, Peter Walker, Amy Holloway, Lois J Appl Clin Med Phys Medical Imaging PURPOSE: To determine baseline accuracy and reproducibility of T(1) and T(2) relaxation times over 12 months on a dedicated radiotherapy MRI scanner. METHODS: An International Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine/National Institute of Standards and Technology (ISMRM/NIST) System Phantom was scanned monthly on a 3T MRI scanner for 1 year. T(1) was measured using inversion recovery (T(1)‐IR) and variable flip angle (T(1)‐VFA) sequences and T(2) was measured using a multi‐echo spin echo (T(2)‐SE) sequence. For each vial in the phantom, accuracy errors (%bias) were determined by the relative differences in measured T(1) and T(2) times compared to reference values. Reproducibility was measured by the coefficient of variation (CV) of T(1) and T(2) measurements across monthly scans. Accuracy and reproducibility were mainly assessed on vials with relaxation times expected to be in physiological ranges at 3T. RESULTS: A strong linear correlation between measured and reference relaxation times was found for all sequences tested (R (2 )> 0.997). Baseline bias (and CV[%]) for T(1)‐IR, T(1)‐VFA and T(2)‐SE sequences were +2.0% (2.1), +6.5% (4.2), and +8.5% (1.9), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy and reproducibility of T(1) and T(2) on the scanner were considered sufficient for the sequences tested. No longitudinal trends of variation were deduced, suggesting less frequent measurements are required following the establishment of baselines. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-09-25 /pmc/articles/PMC8598150/ /pubmed/34562341 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13432 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC on behalf of The American Association of Physicists in Medicine https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Medical Imaging
Carr, Madeline E.
Keenan, Kathryn E.
Rai, Robba
Metcalfe, Peter
Walker, Amy
Holloway, Lois
Determining the longitudinal accuracy and reproducibility of T(1) and T(2) in a 3T MRI scanner
title Determining the longitudinal accuracy and reproducibility of T(1) and T(2) in a 3T MRI scanner
title_full Determining the longitudinal accuracy and reproducibility of T(1) and T(2) in a 3T MRI scanner
title_fullStr Determining the longitudinal accuracy and reproducibility of T(1) and T(2) in a 3T MRI scanner
title_full_unstemmed Determining the longitudinal accuracy and reproducibility of T(1) and T(2) in a 3T MRI scanner
title_short Determining the longitudinal accuracy and reproducibility of T(1) and T(2) in a 3T MRI scanner
title_sort determining the longitudinal accuracy and reproducibility of t(1) and t(2) in a 3t mri scanner
topic Medical Imaging
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8598150/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34562341
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13432
work_keys_str_mv AT carrmadelinee determiningthelongitudinalaccuracyandreproducibilityoft1andt2ina3tmriscanner
AT keenankathryne determiningthelongitudinalaccuracyandreproducibilityoft1andt2ina3tmriscanner
AT rairobba determiningthelongitudinalaccuracyandreproducibilityoft1andt2ina3tmriscanner
AT metcalfepeter determiningthelongitudinalaccuracyandreproducibilityoft1andt2ina3tmriscanner
AT walkeramy determiningthelongitudinalaccuracyandreproducibilityoft1andt2ina3tmriscanner
AT hollowaylois determiningthelongitudinalaccuracyandreproducibilityoft1andt2ina3tmriscanner