Temperature-induced tissue susceptibility changes lead to significant temperature errors in PRFS-based MR thermometry during thermal interventions

Magnetic Resonance in Medicine

Volumn 64, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 1360-1372

  Sprinkhuizen, Sara M ^a   Konings, Maurits K ^b   Van Der Bom, Martijn J ^a   Viergever, Max A ^a   Bakker, Chris J G ^a   Bartels, Lambertus W ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Fat; Glandular tissue; HIFU; PRFS based MR thermometry; Susceptibility; Temperature

Indexed keywords

3D MODELING; ERRORS; HISTOLOGY; MAGNETIC FIELDS; MAGNETIC SUSCEPTIBILITY; NATURAL FREQUENCIES; OILS AND FATS; TEMPERATURE; TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTION; THERMOMETERS;

GLANDULAR TISSUE; HIFU; IMPACT OF TEMPERATURES; MR THERMOMETRY; PROTON RESONANCE FREQUENCY; TEMPERATURE DEPENDENCE; TEMPERATURE DEPENDENT; TEMPERATURE-INDUCED;

TISSUE;

ARTICLE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; MAGNETIC FIELD; MAGNETIC RESONANCE THERMOMETRY; MEASUREMENT ERROR; PHANTOM; PROTON NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE; TEMPERATURE DEPENDENCE; THERMOMETRY; TUMOR ABLATION;

EID: 78349251658     PISSN: 07403194     EISSN: 15222594     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/mrm.22531     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. De Poorter J,. Noninvasive MRI thermometry with the proton resonance frequency method: study of susceptibility effects. Magn Reson Med 1995; 34: 359-367.
2. Stollberger R, Ascher PW, Huber D, Renhart W, Radner H, Ebner F,. Temperature monitoring of interstitial thermal tissue coagulation using MR phase images 2. J Magn Reson Imaging 1998; 8: 188-196.
3. Peters RD, Hinks RS, Henkelman RM,. Heat-source orientation and geometry dependence in proton-resonance frequency shift magnetic resonance thermometry. Magn Reson Med 1999; 41: 909-918.
4. Young IR, Hajnal JV, Roberts IG, Ling JX, Hill-Cottingham RJ, Oatridge A, Wilson JA,. An evaluation of the effects of susceptibility changes on the water chemical shift method of temperature measurement in human peripheral muscle. Magn Reson Med 1996; 36: 366-374.
5. Hindman JC,. Proton resonance shift of water in the gas and liquid states. J Chem Phys 1966; 44: 4582-4592.
6. Salomir R, Denis de Senneville B, Moonen CT,. A fast calculation method for magnetic field inhomogeneity due to an arbitrary distribution of bulk susceptibility. Concepts Magn Reson B: Magn Reson Eng 2003; 19B: 26-34.
7. Marques JP, Bowtell R,. Application of a Fourier-based method for rapid calculation of field inhomogeneity due to spatial variation of magnetic susceptibility. Concepts Magn Reson B 2005; 25B: 65-78.
8. Schenck JF,. The role of magnetic susceptibility in magnetic resonance imaging: MRI magnetic compatibility of the first and second kinds. Med Phys 1996; 23: 815-850.
9. Philo JS, Fairbank WM,. Temperature dependence of the diamagnetism of water. J Chem Phys 1980; 72: 4429.
10. Lide DR, editor. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 90th ed. (Internet Version 2010), Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press/Taylor and Francis.
11. Hopkins JA, Wehrli FW,. Magnetic susceptibility measurement of insoluble solids by NMR: magnetic susceptibility of bone. Magn Reson Med 1997; 37: 494-500.
12. Coupland JN, McClements JD,. Physical properties of liquid edible oils J Am Oil Chem Soc 1997; 74: 1559-1564.
13. Moerland MA, Beersma R, Bhagwandien R, Wijrdeman HK, Bakker CJ,. Analysis and correction of geometric distortions in 1.5 T magnetic resonance images for use in radiotherapy treatment planning. Phys Med Biol 1995; 40: 1651-1654.
14. Furusawa H, Namba K, Nakahara H, Tanaka C, Yasuda Y, Hirabara E, Imahariyama M, Komaki K,. The evolving non-surgical ablation of breast cancer: MR guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS). Breast Cancer 2007; 14: 55-58.
15. Furusawa H, Namba K, Thomsen S, Akiyama F, Bendet A, Tanaka C, Yasuda Y, Nakahara H,. Magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound surgery of breast cancer: reliability and effectiveness. J Am Coll Surg 2006; 203: 54-63.
16. Gianfelice D, Khiat A, Amara M, Belblidia A, Boulanger Y,. MR imaging-guided focused ultrasound surgery of breast cancer: correlation of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI with histopathologic findings. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2003; 82: 93-101.
17. Gianfelice D, Khiat A, Amara M, Belblidia A, Boulanger Y,. MR imaging-guided focused US ablation of breast cancer: histopathologic assessment of effectiveness-initial experience. Radiology 2003; 227: 849-855.
18. Gianfelice D, Khiat A, Boulanger Y, Amara M, Belblidia A,. Feasibility of magnetic resonance imaging-guided focused ultrasound surgery as an adjunct to tamoxifen therapy in high-risk surgical patients with breast carcinoma. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2003; 14: 1275-1282.
19. Huber PE, Jenne JW, Rastert R, Simiantonakis I, Sinn HP, Strittmatter HJ, von Fournier D, Wannenmacher MF, Debus J,. A new noninvasive approach in breast cancer therapy using magnetic resonance imaging-guided focused ultrasound surgery. Cancer Res 2001; 61: 8441-8447.
20. Hynynen K, Pomeroy O, Smith DN, Huber PE, McDannold NJ, Kettenbach J, Baum J, Singer S, Jolesz FA,. MR imaging-guided focused ultrasound surgery of fibroadenomas in the breast: a feasibility study. Radiology 2001; 219: 176-185.
21. Khiat A, Gianfelice D, Amara M, Boulanger Y,. Influence of post-treatment delay on the evaluation of the response to focused ultrasound surgery of breast cancer by dynamic contrast enhanced MRI. Br J Radiol 2006; 79: 308-314.
22. Zippel DB, Papa MZ,. The use of MR imaging guided focused ultrasound in breast cancer patients; a preliminary phase one study and review. Breast Cancer 2005; 12: 32-38.
23. Mougenot C, Quesson B, de Senneville BD, de Oliveira PL, Sprinkhuizen S, Palussiere J, Grenier N, Moonen CT,. Three-dimensional spatial and temporal temperature control with MRT-guided focused ultrasound (MRgHIFU). Magn Reson Med 2009; 61: 603-614.
24. Sapareto SA, Dewey WC,. Thermal dose determination in cancer therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1984; 10: 787-800.