Tyler M Seibert1, Nathan S White2, Gwe-Ya Kim1, Vitali Moiseenko1, Carrie R McDonald3, Nikdokht Farid2, Hauke Bartsch2, Joshua Kuperman2, Roshan Karunamuni1, Deborah Marshall1, Dominic Holland2, Parag Sanghvi1, Daniel R Simpson1, Arno J Mundt1, Anders M Dale4, Jona A Hattangadi-Gluth5. 1. Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California. 2. Department of Radiology, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California. 3. Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California; Department of Psychiatry, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California. 4. Department of Radiology, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California; Department of Neurosciences, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California. 5. Department of Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California. Electronic address: jhattangadi@ucsd.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Anatomic distortion is present in all magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data because of nonlinearity of gradient fields; it measures up to several millimeters. We evaluated the potential for uncorrected MRI to lead to geometric miss of the target volume in stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty-eight SRS cases were studied retrospectively. MRI scans were corrected for gradient nonlinearity distortion in 3 dimensions, and gross tumor volumes (GTVs) were contoured. The manufacturer-specified distortion field was then reapplied to GTV masks to allow measurement of GTV displacement in uncorrected images. The uncorrected GTV was used for SRS planning, and the dose received by the true (corrected) GTV was measured. RESULTS: Median displacement of the GTV resulting from gradient distortion was 1.2 mm (interquartile range, 0.1-2.3 mm), with a minimum of 0 mm and a maximum of 3.9 mm. Eight of the 28 cases met a priori criteria for "geometric miss." CONCLUSIONS: Although MRI distortion is often subtle on visual inspection, there is a significant clinical impact of this distortion on SRS planning. Distortion-corrected MRI should uniformly be used for intracranial radiosurgery planning because uncorrected MRI can lead to potential geometric miss.
PURPOSE: Anatomic distortion is present in all magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data because of nonlinearity of gradient fields; it measures up to several millimeters. We evaluated the potential for uncorrected MRI to lead to geometric miss of the target volume in stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty-eight SRS cases were studied retrospectively. MRI scans were corrected for gradient nonlinearity distortion in 3 dimensions, and gross tumor volumes (GTVs) were contoured. The manufacturer-specified distortion field was then reapplied to GTV masks to allow measurement of GTV displacement in uncorrected images. The uncorrected GTV was used for SRS planning, and the dose received by the true (corrected) GTV was measured. RESULTS: Median displacement of the GTV resulting from gradient distortion was 1.2 mm (interquartile range, 0.1-2.3 mm), with a minimum of 0 mm and a maximum of 3.9 mm. Eight of the 28 cases met a priori criteria for "geometric miss." CONCLUSIONS: Although MRI distortion is often subtle on visual inspection, there is a significant clinical impact of this distortion on SRS planning. Distortion-corrected MRI should uniformly be used for intracranial radiosurgery planning because uncorrected MRI can lead to potential geometric miss.
Authors: Paul A Jursinic; Kim Rickert; Thomas A Gennarelli; Christopher J Schultz Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2005-08-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Tyler M Seibert; Roshan Karunamuni; Samar Kaifi; Jeffrey Burkeen; Michael Connor; Anitha Priya Krishnan; Nathan S White; Nikdokht Farid; Hauke Bartsch; Vyacheslav Murzin; Tanya T Nguyen; Vitali Moiseenko; James B Brewer; Carrie R McDonald; Anders M Dale; Jona A Hattangadi-Gluth Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2017-01-06 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Christine A Edwards; Aaron E Rusheen; Yoonbae Oh; Seungleal B Paek; Joshua Jacobs; Kristen H Lee; Kendall D Dennis; Kevin E Bennet; Abbas Z Kouzani; Kendall H Lee; Stephan J Goerss Journal: J Neural Eng Date: 2018-08-20 Impact factor: 5.379
Authors: Jing Yuan; Stephen C K Law; Ka Kin Wong; Gladys G Lo; Michael K M Kam; Wing Hong Kwan; Cindy Xue; Oi Lei Wong; Siu Ki Yu; Kin Yin Cheung Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2021-08-06 Impact factor: 4.553