TY - JOUR
T1 - Magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasonography fusion guided seed placement in a phantom
T2 - Accuracy between 2-seed versus 1-seed strategies
AU - Li, Qian
AU - Duan, Yu
AU - Baikpour, Masoud
AU - Pierce, Theodore T.
AU - McCarthy, Colin J.
AU - Thabet, Ashraf
AU - Chan, Suk tak
AU - Samir, Anthony E.
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors thank the BK Ultrasound for funding and technical support, Jian Wu and Min Wu for editorial assistance, and Roland McConnell, Department of Biomedical Engineering Model Shop, Massachusetts General Hospital, for the phantom construction.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2020/8
Y1 - 2020/8
N2 - Purpose: To investigate whether the 2-seed placement per Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) suspicious lesion yields a higher seed placement accuracy than a 1-seed strategy on a phantom. Methods: Eight olives embedded in gelatin, each simulating a prostate, underwent MRI. Three virtual spherical lesions (3, 5, and 8 mm diameters) were marked in each olive on the MRI images and co-registered to the MRI/Transrectal Ultrasonography (TRUS) fusion biopsy system. Two radiologists placed 0.5 mm fiducials, targeting the center of each virtual lesion under fusion image guidance. Half of the 8 olives in each phantom were assigned either to the 1-seed or 2-seeds per lesion strategy. Post-procedure Computed Tomography (CT) images identified each seed and were fused with MR to localize each virtual lesion and collected the seed placement error - distance between the virtual target and the corresponding seed (using the closer seed for the 2-seed strategy). Seed placement success is defined as fiducial placement within a lesion boundary. Results: Each operator repeated the procedure on three different phantoms, and data from 209 seeds placed for 137 lesions were analyzed, with an overall error of 3.03 ± 1.52 mm. The operator skill, operator phantom procedural experience, lesion size, and number of seeds, were independently associated with the seed placement error. Seed placement success rate was higher for the 2-seed group compared to 1-seed, although the difference was not statistically significant. Conclusions: Placing 2 seeds per MRI lesion yielded a significantly lower error compared to 1-seed strategy, although seed placement success rate was not significantly different.
AB - Purpose: To investigate whether the 2-seed placement per Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) suspicious lesion yields a higher seed placement accuracy than a 1-seed strategy on a phantom. Methods: Eight olives embedded in gelatin, each simulating a prostate, underwent MRI. Three virtual spherical lesions (3, 5, and 8 mm diameters) were marked in each olive on the MRI images and co-registered to the MRI/Transrectal Ultrasonography (TRUS) fusion biopsy system. Two radiologists placed 0.5 mm fiducials, targeting the center of each virtual lesion under fusion image guidance. Half of the 8 olives in each phantom were assigned either to the 1-seed or 2-seeds per lesion strategy. Post-procedure Computed Tomography (CT) images identified each seed and were fused with MR to localize each virtual lesion and collected the seed placement error - distance between the virtual target and the corresponding seed (using the closer seed for the 2-seed strategy). Seed placement success is defined as fiducial placement within a lesion boundary. Results: Each operator repeated the procedure on three different phantoms, and data from 209 seeds placed for 137 lesions were analyzed, with an overall error of 3.03 ± 1.52 mm. The operator skill, operator phantom procedural experience, lesion size, and number of seeds, were independently associated with the seed placement error. Seed placement success rate was higher for the 2-seed group compared to 1-seed, although the difference was not statistically significant. Conclusions: Placing 2 seeds per MRI lesion yielded a significantly lower error compared to 1-seed strategy, although seed placement success rate was not significantly different.
KW - Magnetic resonance imaging
KW - Phantom
KW - Prostate cancer
KW - Ultrasound fusion biopsy
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85086397093&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85086397093&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ejrad.2020.109126
DO - 10.1016/j.ejrad.2020.109126
M3 - Article
C2 - 32544805
AN - SCOPUS:85086397093
SN - 0720-048X
VL - 129
JO - European Journal of Radiology
JF - European Journal of Radiology
M1 - 109126
ER -