A quality assurance protocol for diffusion tensor imaging using the head phantom from American College of Radiology

Zhiyue J. Wang, Youngseob Seo, Jonathan M. Chia, Nancy K. Rollins

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

22 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To propose a quality assurance procedure for routine clinical diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) using the widely available American College of Radiology (ACR) head phantom. Methods: Analysis was performed on the data acquired at 1.5 and 3.0 T on whole body clinical MRI scanners using the ACR phantom and included the following: (1) the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) at the center and periphery of the phantom, (2) image distortion by EPI readout relative to spin echo imaging, (3) distortion of high-b images relative to the b = 0 image caused by diffusion encoding, and (4) determination of fractional anisotropy (FA) and mean diffusivity (MD) measured with region-of-interest (ROI) and pixel-based approaches. Reproducibility of the measurements was assessed by five repetitions of data acquisition on each scanner. Results: The SNR at the phantom center was approximately half of that near the periphery at both 1.5 and 3 T. The image distortion by the EPI readout was up to 7 mm at 1.5 T and 10 mm at 3 T. The typical distortion caused by eddy currents from diffusion encoding was on the order of 0.5 mm. The difference between ROI-based and pixel-based MD quantification was 1.4% at 1.5 T and 0.3% at 3 T. The ROI-based MD values were in close agreement (within 2%) with the reference values. The ROI-based FA values were approximately a factor of 10 smaller than pixel-based values and less than 0.01. The measurement reproducibility was sufficient for quality assurance (QA) purposes. Conclusions: This QA approach is simple to perform and evaluates key aspects of the scanner performance for DTI data acquisition using a widely available phantom.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)4415-4421
Number of pages7
JournalMedical Physics
Volume38
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 2011

Fingerprint

Diffusion Tensor Imaging
Anisotropy
Signal-To-Noise Ratio
Radiology
Head
Reference Values
Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Keywords

  • diffusion tensor imaging
  • phantom
  • quality assurance
  • quality control

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biophysics
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

A quality assurance protocol for diffusion tensor imaging using the head phantom from American College of Radiology. / Wang, Zhiyue J.; Seo, Youngseob; Chia, Jonathan M.; Rollins, Nancy K.

In: Medical Physics, Vol. 38, No. 7, 07.2011, p. 4415-4421.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{8f5f1559b60249d8aaf6d0f3cf34bda1,
title = "A quality assurance protocol for diffusion tensor imaging using the head phantom from American College of Radiology",
abstract = "Purpose: To propose a quality assurance procedure for routine clinical diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) using the widely available American College of Radiology (ACR) head phantom. Methods: Analysis was performed on the data acquired at 1.5 and 3.0 T on whole body clinical MRI scanners using the ACR phantom and included the following: (1) the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) at the center and periphery of the phantom, (2) image distortion by EPI readout relative to spin echo imaging, (3) distortion of high-b images relative to the b = 0 image caused by diffusion encoding, and (4) determination of fractional anisotropy (FA) and mean diffusivity (MD) measured with region-of-interest (ROI) and pixel-based approaches. Reproducibility of the measurements was assessed by five repetitions of data acquisition on each scanner. Results: The SNR at the phantom center was approximately half of that near the periphery at both 1.5 and 3 T. The image distortion by the EPI readout was up to 7 mm at 1.5 T and 10 mm at 3 T. The typical distortion caused by eddy currents from diffusion encoding was on the order of 0.5 mm. The difference between ROI-based and pixel-based MD quantification was 1.4{\%} at 1.5 T and 0.3{\%} at 3 T. The ROI-based MD values were in close agreement (within 2{\%}) with the reference values. The ROI-based FA values were approximately a factor of 10 smaller than pixel-based values and less than 0.01. The measurement reproducibility was sufficient for quality assurance (QA) purposes. Conclusions: This QA approach is simple to perform and evaluates key aspects of the scanner performance for DTI data acquisition using a widely available phantom.",
keywords = "diffusion tensor imaging, phantom, quality assurance, quality control",
author = "Wang, {Zhiyue J.} and Youngseob Seo and Chia, {Jonathan M.} and Rollins, {Nancy K.}",
year = "2011",
month = "7",
doi = "10.1118/1.3595111",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "38",
pages = "4415--4421",
journal = "Medical Physics",
issn = "0094-2405",
publisher = "AAPM - American Association of Physicists in Medicine",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A quality assurance protocol for diffusion tensor imaging using the head phantom from American College of Radiology

AU - Wang, Zhiyue J.

AU - Seo, Youngseob

AU - Chia, Jonathan M.

AU - Rollins, Nancy K.

PY - 2011/7

Y1 - 2011/7

N2 - Purpose: To propose a quality assurance procedure for routine clinical diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) using the widely available American College of Radiology (ACR) head phantom. Methods: Analysis was performed on the data acquired at 1.5 and 3.0 T on whole body clinical MRI scanners using the ACR phantom and included the following: (1) the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) at the center and periphery of the phantom, (2) image distortion by EPI readout relative to spin echo imaging, (3) distortion of high-b images relative to the b = 0 image caused by diffusion encoding, and (4) determination of fractional anisotropy (FA) and mean diffusivity (MD) measured with region-of-interest (ROI) and pixel-based approaches. Reproducibility of the measurements was assessed by five repetitions of data acquisition on each scanner. Results: The SNR at the phantom center was approximately half of that near the periphery at both 1.5 and 3 T. The image distortion by the EPI readout was up to 7 mm at 1.5 T and 10 mm at 3 T. The typical distortion caused by eddy currents from diffusion encoding was on the order of 0.5 mm. The difference between ROI-based and pixel-based MD quantification was 1.4% at 1.5 T and 0.3% at 3 T. The ROI-based MD values were in close agreement (within 2%) with the reference values. The ROI-based FA values were approximately a factor of 10 smaller than pixel-based values and less than 0.01. The measurement reproducibility was sufficient for quality assurance (QA) purposes. Conclusions: This QA approach is simple to perform and evaluates key aspects of the scanner performance for DTI data acquisition using a widely available phantom.

AB - Purpose: To propose a quality assurance procedure for routine clinical diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) using the widely available American College of Radiology (ACR) head phantom. Methods: Analysis was performed on the data acquired at 1.5 and 3.0 T on whole body clinical MRI scanners using the ACR phantom and included the following: (1) the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) at the center and periphery of the phantom, (2) image distortion by EPI readout relative to spin echo imaging, (3) distortion of high-b images relative to the b = 0 image caused by diffusion encoding, and (4) determination of fractional anisotropy (FA) and mean diffusivity (MD) measured with region-of-interest (ROI) and pixel-based approaches. Reproducibility of the measurements was assessed by five repetitions of data acquisition on each scanner. Results: The SNR at the phantom center was approximately half of that near the periphery at both 1.5 and 3 T. The image distortion by the EPI readout was up to 7 mm at 1.5 T and 10 mm at 3 T. The typical distortion caused by eddy currents from diffusion encoding was on the order of 0.5 mm. The difference between ROI-based and pixel-based MD quantification was 1.4% at 1.5 T and 0.3% at 3 T. The ROI-based MD values were in close agreement (within 2%) with the reference values. The ROI-based FA values were approximately a factor of 10 smaller than pixel-based values and less than 0.01. The measurement reproducibility was sufficient for quality assurance (QA) purposes. Conclusions: This QA approach is simple to perform and evaluates key aspects of the scanner performance for DTI data acquisition using a widely available phantom.

KW - diffusion tensor imaging

KW - phantom

KW - quality assurance

KW - quality control

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79960212971&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79960212971&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1118/1.3595111

DO - 10.1118/1.3595111

M3 - Article

VL - 38

SP - 4415

EP - 4421

JO - Medical Physics

JF - Medical Physics

SN - 0094-2405

IS - 7

ER -