Anthropomorphic brain phantoms for use in MRI systems: a systematic review.
Artifacts
Brain
Imaging
Magnetic resonance imaging
Phantoms
Journal
Magma (New York, N.Y.)
ISSN: 1352-8661
Titre abrégé: MAGMA
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9310752
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2022
Apr 2022
Historique:
received:
27
05
2021
accepted:
16
08
2021
revised:
13
08
2021
pubmed:
1
9
2021
medline:
13
4
2022
entrez:
31
8
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To provide a systematic review of available brain MRI phantoms for comparison of structural and functional characteristics. Phantoms were identified from a literature search using two databases including Google Scholar and PubMed. Narrow inclusion criteria were followed for identification of only tissue-mimicking MRI phantoms excluding digital, computational, or numerical phantoms. Assessment criteria for the identified phantoms was based on three categories being anatomical accuracy, tissue-mimicking materials, and exhibiting relaxation times approximating in-vivo tissues. The available features and uses of each phantom were reported and discussed using the assessment criteria. Ten phantoms were identified after screening; each proposed phantom was then summarized in a table (Table 2). Significant features and characteristics were shown in the comparisons of phantom type in each category, being anthropomorphic vs. traditional phantoms. Anthropomorphic phantoms had more anatomically accurate features than traditional phantoms. On the other hand, traditional phantoms commonly used effective tissue-mimicking materials and accurate electromagnetic properties. The findings provide an overview of the different proposed tissue-mimicking MRI brain phantoms available. Various uses and features are highlighted by comparing criteria such as anatomical accuracy, tissue-mimicking material, and electromagnetic properties. Tissue-mimicking MRI phantoms are an extremely useful tool for researchers and clinicians. Future applications include personalized phantom technology and validation of MR imaging and segmentation methods.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34463866
doi: 10.1007/s10334-021-00953-w
pii: 10.1007/s10334-021-00953-w
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
277-289Subventions
Organisme : Ryerson University
ID : RGPIN-2018-04155
Informations de copyright
© 2021. European Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine and Biology (ESMRMB).
Références
Valladares A, Beyer T, Rausch I (2020) Physical imaging phantoms for simulation of tumor heterogeneity in PET, CT, and MRI: an overview of existing designs. Med Phys 47(4):2023–2037. https://doi.org/10.1002/mp.14045
doi: 10.1002/mp.14045
pubmed: 31981214
Keenan KE et al (2018) Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging phantoms: a review and the need for a system phantom. Magn Reson Med 79(1):48–61. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.26982
doi: 10.1002/mrm.26982
pubmed: 29083101
Fieremans E, Lee HH (2018) Physical and numerical phantoms for the validation of brain microstructural MRI: a cookbook. Neuroimage 182:39–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.06.046
doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.06.046
pubmed: 29920376
Despotović I, Goossens B, Philips W (2015) MRI segmentation of the human brain: challenges, methods, and applications. Comput Math Methods Med. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/450341
doi: 10.1155/2015/450341
pubmed: 25945121
pmcid: 4402572
Medeiros Oliveira Ramos S, Thomas S, Bárbara Torres Berdeguez M, Vasconcellos de Sá L, Augusto Lopesde Souza S (2017) Anthropomorphic phantoms—potential for more studies and training in radiology. Int J Radiol Radiat Ther. https://doi.org/10.15406/ijrrt.2017.02.00033
doi: 10.15406/ijrrt.2017.02.00033
Forte AE, Galvan S, Manieri F, Rodriguez y Baena F, Dini D (2016) A composite hydrogel for brain tissue phantoms. Mater Des 112:227–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2016.09.063
doi: 10.1016/j.matdes.2016.09.063
Winslow JF, Hyer DE, Fisher RF, Tien CJ, Hintenlang DE (2009) Construction of anthropomorphic phantoms for use in dosimetry studies. J Appl Clin Med Phys 10(3):195–204. https://doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v10i3.2986
doi: 10.1120/jacmp.v10i3.2986
pubmed: 19692982
pmcid: 5720556
Kato H et al (2005) Composition of MRI phantom equivalent to human tissues. Med Phys 32(10):3199–3208. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.2047807
doi: 10.1118/1.2047807
pubmed: 16279073
Droby A et al (2015) A human post-mortem brain model for the standardization of multi-centre MRI studies. Neuroimage 110:11–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.01.028
doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.01.028
pubmed: 25595502
Hellerbach A, Schuster V, Jansen A, Sommer J (2013) MRI phantoms—are there alternatives to agar? PLoS ONE 8(8):e70343. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0070343
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0070343
pubmed: 23940563
pmcid: 3734012
Shulman M et al (2020) Quantitative analysis of fetal magnetic resonance phantoms and recommendations for an anthropomorphic motion phantom. Magn Reson Mater Phys Biol Med 33(2):257–272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10334-019-00775-x
doi: 10.1007/s10334-019-00775-x
Rice JR, Milbrandt RH, Madsen EL, Frank GR, Boote EJ, Blechinger JC (1998) Anthropomorphic 1H MRS head phantom. Med Phys 25(7):1145–1156. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.598306
doi: 10.1118/1.598306
pubmed: 9682200
Surry KJM, Austin HJB, Fenster A, Peters TM (2004) Poly(vinyl alcohol) cryogel phantoms for use in ultrasound and MR imaging. Phys Med Biol 49(24):5529–5546. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/49/24/009
doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/49/24/009
pubmed: 15724540
Shmueli K, Thomas DL, Ordidge RJ (2007) Design, construction and evaluation of an anthropomorphic head phantom with realistic susceptibility artifacts. J Magn Reson Imaging 26(1):202–207. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.20993
doi: 10.1002/jmri.20993
pubmed: 17659546
Chen SJ-S et al (2012) An anthropomorphic polyvinyl alcohol brain phantom based on Colin27 for use in multimodal imaging. Med Phys 39(1):554–561. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3673069
doi: 10.1118/1.3673069
pubmed: 22225325
Khan AF, Drozd JJ, Moreland RK, Ta RM, Borrie MJ, Bartha R (2012) A novel MRI-compatible brain ventricle phantom for validation of segmentation and volumetry methods. J Magn Reson Imaging 36(2):476–482. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.23612
doi: 10.1002/jmri.23612
pubmed: 22396226
Gallas RR, Hünemohr N, Runz A, Niebuhr NI, Jäkel O, Greilich S (2015) An anthropomorphic multimodality (CT/MRI) head phantom prototype for end-to-end tests in ion radiotherapy. Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik, 25(4):391–399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.zemedi.2015.05.003
Wood S et al (2017) Design and fabrication of a realistic anthropomorphic heterogeneous head phantom for MR purposes. PLoS ONE 12(8):e0183168. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0183168
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0183168
pubmed: 28806768
pmcid: 5555696
Kozana A, Boursianis T, Kalaitzakis G, Raissaki M, Maris TG (2018) Neonatal brain: fabrication of a tissue-mimicking phantom and optimization of clinical Τ1w and T2w MRI sequences at 1.5 T. Phys Medica 55:88–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2018.10.022
doi: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2018.10.022
Altermatt A et al (2019) Design and construction of an innovative brain phantom prototype for MRI. Magn Reson Med 81(2):1165–1171. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.27464
doi: 10.1002/mrm.27464
pubmed: 30221790
Amiri H, Brouwer I, Kuijer JPA, de Munck JC, Barkhof F, Vrenken H (2019) Novel imaging phantom for accurate and robust measurement of brain atrophy rates using clinical MRI. NeuroImage Clin 21:101667. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nicl.2019.101667
doi: 10.1016/j.nicl.2019.101667
pubmed: 30665101
pmcid: 6350260
Filippou V, Tsoumpas C (2018) Recent advances on the development of phantoms using 3D printing for imaging with CT, MRI, PET, SPECT, and ultrasound. Med Phys 45(9):e740–e760. https://doi.org/10.1002/mp.13058
doi: 10.1002/mp.13058
Kasten JA, Vetterli T, Lazeyras F, Van De Ville D (2016) 3D-printed shepp-logan phantom as a real-world benchmark for MRI. Magn Reson Med 75(1):287–294. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.25593
doi: 10.1002/mrm.25593
pubmed: 25644140
Keenan K, Stupic KF, Boss MA, Russek SE (2015) Standardized phantoms for quantitative cardiac MRI. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 17(1):1–2. https://doi.org/10.1186/1532-429X-17-S1-W36 .
Gupta N, Khanna P (2017) A non-invasive and adaptive CAD system to detect brain tumor from T2-weighted MRIs using customized Otsu’s thresholding with prominent features and supervised learning. Signal Process Image Commun 59:18–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.image.2017.05.013
doi: 10.1016/j.image.2017.05.013
Bloem JL, Reijnierse M, Huizinga TWJ, Van Der Helm Van Mil AHM (2018) MR signal intensity: staying on the bright side in MR image interpretation. Open 4:728. https://doi.org/10.1136/rmdopen-2018-000728
doi: 10.1136/rmdopen-2018-000728
Yoshimura K et al (2003) Development of a tissue-equivalent MRI phantom using carrageenan gel. Magn Reson Med 50(5):1011–1017. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.10619
doi: 10.1002/mrm.10619
pubmed: 14587012
Hattori K et al (2013) Development of MRI phantom equivalent to human tissues for 3.0-T MRI. Med Phys. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4790023
doi: 10.1118/1.4790023
pubmed: 23464335
Maclaren J, Han Z, Vos SB, Fischbein N, Bammer R (2014) Reliability of brain volume measurements: a test–retest dataset. Sci Data 1(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2014.37
doi: 10.1038/sdata.2014.37
Tarasek MR et al (2014) Validation of MR thermometry: method for temperature probe sensor registration accuracy in head and neck phantoms. Int J Hyperth 30(2):142–149. https://doi.org/10.3109/02656736.2014.887794
doi: 10.3109/02656736.2014.887794
Rieke V, Pauly KB (2008) MR thermometry. J Magn Reson Imaging 27(2):376–390. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.21265
doi: 10.1002/jmri.21265
pubmed: 18219673
pmcid: 2780364