ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2025
Characterizing geometrical distortions in MRI for radiotherapy: Evaluating MR-SIM protocols and dose accuracy in stereotactic radiosurgery using AAPM TG-284 criteria.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep learning-based generation of direct stopping power ratio maps for MR-only proton therapy of primary brain tumor patients.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- CT-Based Glioma Segmentation Using Deep Learning: Validation for Emergency Neuro-oncological Care.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Characterizing geometrical distortions in MRI for radiotherapy: Evaluating MR-SIM protocols and dose accuracy in stereotactic radiosurgery using AAPM TG-284 criteria.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveMagnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is crucial for diagnostic imaging and radiotherapy (RT) planning due to its superior soft tissue contrast. However, geometric distortions can affect treatment accuracy. This study evaluates the geometric accuracy of MRI protocols using a 1.5T MR-Sim scanner for RT and their dosimetric impacts. MATERIALS AND
methodsGeometric distortion was assessed using the CIRS 604-GS MR Image Distortion Phantom with 2152 control points across various MRI sequences. A central cubic structure and surrounding regions were analyzed, totaling 27 structures. Rigid registration in Eclipse V18.1 aligned MRI images to CT images, with verified accuracy and visual inspection. An evaluation of the overlap and surface distance metrics was performed through MIM Mastro. Geometric distortion was quantified using 3D distortion analysis software, comparing marker coordinates to reference CT scans. Twenty-seven VMAT full arc plans were done in Eclipse on 27 paired structures, irradiated with 16 Gy in a single fraction at 6 MV energy using the Acuros XB algorithm
resultsAll 3D sequences demonstrated mean distortions of 0.4-0.5 mm, with maximum distortions of up to 3.3 mm in the TOF (time of flight) Angiography sequence. In contrast, the T2 TSE 2D sequence showed larger distortions (mean 1.4 mm, max. 9.7 mm). The center structure showed stable dosimetric performance (D
conclusionPrecise MR protocols are essential for accurate tumor delineation and RT planning. While all sequences showed acceptable accuracy, 3D sequences are superior for high-precision RT.
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.