OBJECTIVE: To eliminate the effects of body deformation for MR-based prostate treatment planning, coil mounts are essential. In this study, we evaluated the effect of the coil set-up on image quality. METHODS: A custom-designed pelvic-shaped phantom was scanned by systematically increasing the anterior body-to-coil (BTC) distance from 30 to 90 mm. The image quality near the organs of interest was determined in order to characterize the relationship between image quality and BTC distance at the critical organ structures. The half intensity reduction (HIR) was calculated to determine the sensitivity of each organ structure to the BTC distance change. RESULTS: As the BTC distance increased, the uniformity reduced at 3% per millimetre. The HIR value indicated that the bladder signal is most sensitive to the change in BTC distance. By maintaining a constant BTC distance set-up, the intensity uniformity was improved by 28% along the B0 directions. CONCLUSION: Positioning the MRI coil on mounts can reduce body deformation but adversely degrades the image quality. The magnitude of this effect has been quantified for prostate MR simulation scanning. The coil needs to be positioned not only with a minimal but also uniform BTC distance in order to maximize image quality. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: A method to characterize the effect on image quality due to the use of coil mounts was demonstrated. Coil mounts whose height can be adjusted individually to keep BTC distance constant are necessary to maintain a uniform image across the entire field of view.
OBJECTIVE: To eliminate the effects of body deformation for MR-based prostate treatment planning, coil mounts are essential. In this study, we evaluated the effect of the coil set-up on image quality. METHODS: A custom-designed pelvic-shaped phantom was scanned by systematically increasing the anterior body-to-coil (BTC) distance from 30 to 90 mm. The image quality near the organs of interest was determined in order to characterize the relationship between image quality and BTC distance at the critical organ structures. The half intensity reduction (HIR) was calculated to determine the sensitivity of each organ structure to the BTC distance change. RESULTS: As the BTC distance increased, the uniformity reduced at 3% per millimetre. The HIR value indicated that the bladder signal is most sensitive to the change in BTC distance. By maintaining a constant BTC distance set-up, the intensity uniformity was improved by 28% along the B0 directions. CONCLUSION: Positioning the MRI coil on mounts can reduce body deformation but adversely degrades the image quality. The magnitude of this effect has been quantified for prostate MR simulation scanning. The coil needs to be positioned not only with a minimal but also uniform BTC distance in order to maximize image quality. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: A method to characterize the effect on image quality due to the use of coil mounts was demonstrated. Coil mounts whose height can be adjusted individually to keep BTC distance constant are necessary to maintain a uniform image across the entire field of view.
Authors: Jan J W Lagendijk; Bas W Raaymakers; Alexander J E Raaijmakers; Johan Overweg; Kevin J Brown; Ellen M Kerkhof; Richard W van der Put; Björn Hårdemark; Marco van Vulpen; Uulke A van der Heide Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2007-11-26 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Peter B Greer; Jason A Dowling; Jonathon A Lambert; Jurgen Fripp; Joel Parker; James W Denham; Chris Wratten; Anne Capp; Olivier Salvado Journal: Med J Aust Date: 2011-02-21 Impact factor: 7.738
Authors: Jonathan Lambert; Peter B Greer; Fred Menk; Jackie Patterson; Joel Parker; Kara Dahl; Sanjiv Gupta; Anne Capp; Chris Wratten; Colin Tang; Mahesh Kumar; Jason Dowling; Sarah Hauville; Cynthia Hughes; Kristen Fisher; Peter Lau; James W Denham; Olivier Salvado Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2011-02-19 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Lili Chen; Robert A Price; Lu Wang; Jinsheng Li; Lihong Qin; Shawn McNeeley; C-M Charlie Ma; Gary M Freedman; Alan Pollack Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2004-10-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Jidi Sun; Jason A Dowling; Peter Pichler; Joel Parker; Jarad Martin; Peter Stanwell; Jameen Arm; Fred Menk; Peter B Greer Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2015-03-08 Impact factor: 2.102
Authors: Carri K Glide-Hurst; Eric S Paulson; Kiaran McGee; Neelam Tyagi; Yanle Hu; James Balter; John Bayouth Journal: Med Phys Date: 2021-07 Impact factor: 4.071