Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.17946/JRST.2022.45.1.11

Evaluation of the Resolution Characteristics by Using American College of Radiology Phantom for Magnetic Resonance Imaging  

Min, Jung-Whan (Department of Radiological technology, Shingu University)
Jeong, Hoi-Woun (Department of Radiological Science, Baekseok Culture University)
Han, Ji-Hyun (Department of Radiology, Yonsei University, Gangnam Severance Hospital)
Lee, Si-Nae (Department of Radiology, Yonsei University, Gangnam Severance Hospital)
Kim, Min-Ji (Department of Radiology, Yonsei University, Gangnam Severance Hospital)
Kim, Seung-Chul (Institute of Health Sciences Reserch, Korea University)
Publication Information
Journal of radiological science and technology / v.45, no.1, 2022 , pp. 11-17 More about this Journal
Abstract
This study was purpose to quantitative assessment of the resolution characteristics by using American college of radiology(ACR) phantom for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The MRI equipment was used (Achiva 3.0T MRI, Philips system, Netherlands) and the head/neck matrix shim SENSE head coil were 32 channels(elements) receive MR coil. And the MRI equipment was used (Discovery MR 750, 3.0T MRI, GE medical system, America) and the head/neck matrix shim MC 3003G-32R 32-CH head coil were receive MR coil. As for the modulation transfer function(MTF) comparison result by using ACR magnetic resonance imaging phantom, the MTF value of the ACR standard T2 image in GE equipment is 0.199 when the frequency is 1.0 mm-1 and the MTF value of the hospital T2 image in Philips equipment is 0.528. It was used efficiently by using a general sequence more than the standard sequence method using the ACR phantom. In addition it is significant that the quantitative quality assurance evaluation method for resolution characteristics was applied mutatis mutandis, and the result values of the physical image characteristics of the 3.0T MRI device were presented.
Keywords
ACR Magnetic resonance imaging Phantom; Modulation transfer function; Edge method; Fujita method; Quality Assurance;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 6  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Greer PB, Van Doorn T. Evaluation of an algorithm for the assessment of the MTF using an edge method. Medical Physics. 2000;27:2048-59.   DOI
2 Och JG, Clarke GD, Sobol WT, Rosen CW, Mun SK. Acceptance testing of magnetic resonance imaging systems: Report of AAPM Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Task Group No. 6. Med Phys. 1992;19:217-29.   DOI
3 American College of Radiology. Phantom test guidance for the ACR MRI accreditation program. Reston: American College of Radiology; 2000.
4 Choi YJ, Kweon DC. Evaluation of TOF MR Anagiography and Imaging for the Half Scan Factor of Cerebral Artery. Journal of the Korean Magnetics Society. 2016;26(3):92-8.   DOI
5 Lee JW, Ahn KJ, Lee SK, Na DG, Oh CH, Chang YM, et al. Usefulness of ACR MRI phantom for quality assurance of MRI instruments. Journal Korean Society Radiology. 2006;54(1):47-55.   DOI
6 Hahm HK. The study on the subject development of MRI image quality evaluation Department of Radiology. Graduate school of Public Health Eulji University; 2008.
7 IEC(International Electrotechnical Commission) 62220-1. Medical electrical equipment Characteristics of digital X-ray imaging devices Part 1: Determination of the detective quantum efficiency. Geneva; 2003.
8 Kim KW, Jeong HW, Min JW, et al. Measurement of Image Quality According to the Time of Computed Radiography System. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2015;38(4):365-74.   DOI
9 Fujita H, Tasai DY, Itoh T, et al. A simple method for determining the modulation transfer function in digital radiography. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 1992;11(1):34-9.   DOI
10 American College of Radiology. MRI quality control manual. American College of Radiology, Reston; 2004.
11 Mohapatra SM, Turley JD, Prince JR, et al. Transfer function measurement and analysis for magnetic resonance imager. Med Phys. 1991;18(6):1141-4.   DOI
12 Jeong HW, Min JW, Kim JM, et al. Investigation of Physical Imaging Properties in Various Digital Radiography System. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2017;40(3):363-70.   DOI
13 Kim KW, Jeong HW, Min JW, et al. Evaluation of the Performance Characteristic for Mammography by Using Edge device. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2016;39(3):415-20.   DOI
14 Min JW, Jeong HW, Kim KW, et al. Study on the Resolution Characteristics by Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging 3.0T. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2020;43(4):251-7.   DOI
15 Min JW, Jeong HW, Kim SC. Evaluation of Noise Power Spectrum Characteristics by Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging 3.0T. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2021;44(1):279-88.
16 Miyati T, Fujita H, Kasuga T, et al. Measurements of MTF and SNR(f) using a subtraction method im MRI. Physics in Medicine and Biology. 2002;47:961-72.   DOI
17 Steckner MC, Drost DJ, Prato FS. Computing the modulation transfer function of a magnetic resonance imager. Med Phys. 1994;21:483-9.   DOI
18 Min JW, Jeong HW, Kim KW, et al. Comparison of Noise Power Spectrum in Measurements by Using International Electrotechnical Commission Standard Devices in Indirect Digital Radiography. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2018;41(5):57-62.
19 Min JW, Jeong HW. Comparison of Modulation Transfer Function in Measurements by Using Edge Device angle in Indirect Digital Radiography. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2019;42(4):259-63.   DOI
20 Kim KW, Jeong HW, Min JW, et al. Evaluation of the Modulation Transfer Function for Computed Tomography by Using American Association Physics Medicine Phantom. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2016;39(2):193-8.   DOI
21 Samei E, Flynn MJ, Reimann DA, et al. A method for measuring the presampled MTF of digital radiographic systems using an edge test device. Medical Physics. 1998;25:102-13.   DOI
22 Jeong HW, Min JW, Kim JM, et al. Performance Characteristic of a CsI(Tl) Flat Panel Detector Radiography System. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2012;35(2):109-17.