ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2020
Audit feasibility for geometric distortion in magnetic resonance imaging for radiotherapy.
Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating stereotactic accuracy with patient-specific MRI distortion corrections for frame-based radiosurgery.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
- Impact of magnetic resonance imaging-related geometric distortion of dose distribution in fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy in patients with brain metastases.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2024Article
- Relationship between imaging parameters and distortion in magnetic resonance images for gamma knife treatment planning.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2023Article
- Rapid distortion correction enables accurate magnetic resonance imaging-guided real-time adaptive radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2023Article
- Assessment of MRI image distortion based on 6 consecutive years of annual QAs and measurements on 14 MRI scanners used for radiation therapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2023Article
- Clinical impact of magnetic resonance imaging distortions on gamma knife radiosurgery.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
background and purposeMagnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is increasingly being used in radiotherapy (RT). However, geometric distortions are a known challenge of using MRI in RT. The aim of this study was to demonstrate feasibility of a national audit of MRI geometric distortions. This was achieved by assessing large field of view (FOV) MRI distortions on a number of scanners used clinically for RT. MATERIALS AND
methodsMRI scans of a large FOV MRI geometric distortion phantom were acquired on 11 MRI scanners that are used clinically for RT in the UK. The mean and maximum distortions and variance between scanners were reported at different distances from the isocentre.
resultsFor a small FOV representing a brain (100-150 mm from isocentre) all distortions were < 2 mm except for the maximum distortion of one scanner. For a large FOV representing a head and neck/pelvis (200-250 mm from isocentre) mean distortions were < 2 mm except for one scanner, maximum distortions were > 10 mm in some cases. The variance between scanners was low and was found to increase with distance from isocentre.
conclusionsThis study demonstrated feasibility of the technique to be repeated in a country wide geometric distortion audit of all MRI scanners used clinically for RT. Recommendations were made for performing such an audit and how to derive acceptable limits of distortion in such an audit.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.