Sensitivity analysis of different quality assurance methods for magnetic resonance imaging in radiotherapy

Background and purpose: There are currently no standard quality assurance (QA) methods for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in radiotherapy (RT). This work was aimed at evaluating the ability of two QA protocols to detect common events that affect quality of MR images under RT settings. Materials an...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Mary Adjeiwaah, Anders Garpebring, Tufve Nyholm
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2020-01-01
Series:Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405631620300051
Description
Summary:Background and purpose: There are currently no standard quality assurance (QA) methods for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in radiotherapy (RT). This work was aimed at evaluating the ability of two QA protocols to detect common events that affect quality of MR images under RT settings. Materials and methods: The American College of Radiology (ACR) MRI QA phantom was repeatedly scanned using a flexible coil and action limits for key image quality parameters were derived. Using an exploratory survey, issues that reduce MR image quality were identified. The most commonly occurring events were introduced as provocations to produce MR images with degraded quality. From these images, detection sensitivities of the ACR MRI QA protocol and a commercial geometric accuracy phantom were determined. Results: Machine-specific action limits for key image quality parameters set at mean±3σ were comparable with the ACR acceptable values. For the geometric accuracy phantom, provocations from uncorrected gradient nonlinearity effects and a piece of metal in the bore of the scanner resulted in worst distortions of 22.2 mm and 3.4 mm, respectively. The ACR phantom was sensitive to uncorrected signal variations, electric interference and a piece of metal in the bore of the scanner but could not adequately detect individual coil element failures. Conclusions: The ACR MRI QA phantom combined with the large field-of-view commercial geometric accuracy phantom were generally sensitive in identifying some common MR image quality issues. The two protocols when combined may provide a tool to monitor the performance of MRI systems in the radiotherapy environment. Keywords: MRI in RT, Quality assurance, ACR, Image quality, Sensitivity analysis, Large geometric accuracy phantom
ISSN:2405-6316