Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Digital Imaging 2/2017

01-04-2017

An Automatic Image Processing Workflow for Daily Magnetic Resonance Imaging Quality Assurance

Authors: Juha I. Peltonen, Teemu Mäkelä, Alexey Sofiev, Eero Salli

Published in: Journal of Imaging Informatics in Medicine | Issue 2/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

The performance of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) equipment is typically monitored with a quality assurance (QA) program. The QA program includes various tests performed at regular intervals. Users may execute specific tests, e.g., daily, weekly, or monthly. The exact interval of these measurements varies according to the department policies, machine setup and usage, manufacturer’s recommendations, and available resources. In our experience, a single image acquired before the first patient of the day offers a low effort and effective system check. When this daily QA check is repeated with identical imaging parameters and phantom setup, the data can be used to derive various time series of the scanner performance. However, daily QA with manual processing can quickly become laborious in a multi-scanner environment. Fully automated image analysis and results output can positively impact the QA process by decreasing reaction time, improving repeatability, and by offering novel performance evaluation methods. In this study, we have developed a daily MRI QA workflow that can measure multiple scanner performance parameters with minimal manual labor required. The daily QA system is built around a phantom image taken by the radiographers at the beginning of day. The image is acquired with a consistent phantom setup and standardized imaging parameters. Recorded parameters are processed into graphs available to everyone involved in the MRI QA process via a web-based interface. The presented automatic MRI QA system provides an efficient tool for following the short- and long-term stability of MRI scanners.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Firbank MJ, Harrison RM, Williams ED, Coulthard A: Quality assurance for MRI: practical experience. Br J Radiol 73:376–383, 2000CrossRefPubMed Firbank MJ, Harrison RM, Williams ED, Coulthard A: Quality assurance for MRI: practical experience. Br J Radiol 73:376–383, 2000CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference McRobbie D, Quest R: Effectiveness and relevance of MR acceptance testing: results of an 8 year audit. Br J Radiol 75:523–531, 2002CrossRefPubMed McRobbie D, Quest R: Effectiveness and relevance of MR acceptance testing: results of an 8 year audit. Br J Radiol 75:523–531, 2002CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Ihalainen T, Sipilä O, Savolainen S: MRI quality control: six imagers studied using eleven unified image quality parameters. Eur Radiol 14:1859–1865, 2004CrossRefPubMed Ihalainen T, Sipilä O, Savolainen S: MRI quality control: six imagers studied using eleven unified image quality parameters. Eur Radiol 14:1859–1865, 2004CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Ihalainen TM, Lönnroth NT, Peltonen JI, Uusi-Simola JK, Timonen MH, Kuusela LJ, Savolainen SE, Sipilä OE: MRI quality assurance using the ACR phantom in a multi-unit imaging center. Acta Oncol 50:966–972, 2011CrossRefPubMed Ihalainen TM, Lönnroth NT, Peltonen JI, Uusi-Simola JK, Timonen MH, Kuusela LJ, Savolainen SE, Sipilä OE: MRI quality assurance using the ACR phantom in a multi-unit imaging center. Acta Oncol 50:966–972, 2011CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Koller C, Eatough J, Mountford P, Frain G: A survey of MRI quality assurance programmes. Br J Radiol 79:592–596, 2014CrossRef Koller C, Eatough J, Mountford P, Frain G: A survey of MRI quality assurance programmes. Br J Radiol 79:592–596, 2014CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Reiner BI: Automating quality assurance for digital radiography. J Am Coll Radiol 6:486–490, 2009CrossRefPubMed Reiner BI: Automating quality assurance for digital radiography. J Am Coll Radiol 6:486–490, 2009CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Bourel P, Gibon D, Coste E, Daanen V, Rousseau J: Automatic quality assessment protocol for MRI equipment. Med Phys 26:2693–2700, 1999CrossRefPubMed Bourel P, Gibon D, Coste E, Daanen V, Rousseau J: Automatic quality assessment protocol for MRI equipment. Med Phys 26:2693–2700, 1999CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Gardner EA, Ellis JH, Hyde RJ, Aisen AM, Quint DJ, Carson PL: Detection of degradation of magnetic resonance (MR) images: comparison of an automated MR image-quality analysis system with trained human observers. Acad Radiol 2:277–281, 1995CrossRefPubMed Gardner EA, Ellis JH, Hyde RJ, Aisen AM, Quint DJ, Carson PL: Detection of degradation of magnetic resonance (MR) images: comparison of an automated MR image-quality analysis system with trained human observers. Acad Radiol 2:277–281, 1995CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Gunter JL, Bernstein MA, Borowski BJ, Ward CP, Britson PJ, Felmlee JP, Schuff N, Weiner M, Jack CR: Measurement of MRI scanner performance with the ADNI phantom. Med Phys 36:2193–2205, 2009CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Gunter JL, Bernstein MA, Borowski BJ, Ward CP, Britson PJ, Felmlee JP, Schuff N, Weiner M, Jack CR: Measurement of MRI scanner performance with the ADNI phantom. Med Phys 36:2193–2205, 2009CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
go back to reference Mortamet B, Bernstein MA, Jack CR, Gunter JL, Ward C, Britson PJ, Meuli R, Thiran J, Krueger G: Automatic quality assessment in structural brain magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Med 62:365–372, 2009CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Mortamet B, Bernstein MA, Jack CR, Gunter JL, Ward C, Britson PJ, Meuli R, Thiran J, Krueger G: Automatic quality assessment in structural brain magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Med 62:365–372, 2009CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
go back to reference Gedamu EL, Collins D, Arnold DL: Automated quality control of brain MR images. J Magn Reson Imaging 28:308–319, 2008CrossRefPubMed Gedamu EL, Collins D, Arnold DL: Automated quality control of brain MR images. J Magn Reson Imaging 28:308–319, 2008CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Esparza ML, Welch EB and Landman BA: Automating PACS quality control with the Vanderbilt image processing enterprise resource: 83190H-83190H-7, 2012 Esparza ML, Welch EB and Landman BA: Automating PACS quality control with the Vanderbilt image processing enterprise resource: 83190H-83190H-7, 2012
13.
go back to reference Sun J, Barnes M, Dowling J, Menk F, Stanwell P, Greer PB: An open source automatic quality assurance (OSAQA) tool for the ACR MRI phantom. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med 38:39–46, 2014CrossRefPubMed Sun J, Barnes M, Dowling J, Menk F, Stanwell P, Greer PB: An open source automatic quality assurance (OSAQA) tool for the ACR MRI phantom. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med 38:39–46, 2014CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Nowik P, Bujila R, Poludniowski G, Fransson A: Quality control of CT systems by automated monitoring of key performance indicators: a two-year study. J Appl Clin Med Phys 16:254–265, 2015CrossRefPubMed Nowik P, Bujila R, Poludniowski G, Fransson A: Quality control of CT systems by automated monitoring of key performance indicators: a two-year study. J Appl Clin Med Phys 16:254–265, 2015CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference National Electrical Manufacturers Association: NEMA Standards Publication MS 1–2008 Determination of Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) in Diagnostic Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 2008 National Electrical Manufacturers Association: NEMA Standards Publication MS 1–2008 Determination of Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) in Diagnostic Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 2008
16.
go back to reference National Electrical Manufacturers Association: NEMA Standards Publication MS 3–2008 Determination of Image Uniformity in Diagnostic Magnetic Resonance Images, 2008 National Electrical Manufacturers Association: NEMA Standards Publication MS 3–2008 Determination of Image Uniformity in Diagnostic Magnetic Resonance Images, 2008
17.
go back to reference International Engineering Consortium:.IEC 62464–1.Magnetic Resonance Equipment for Medical Imaging—Part 1: Determination of Essential Image Quality Parameters, 2007 International Engineering Consortium:.IEC 62464–1.Magnetic Resonance Equipment for Medical Imaging—Part 1: Determination of Essential Image Quality Parameters, 2007
18.
go back to reference Bayuk L, de Benito M and Ottenheimer A:.PHPlot Reference Manual, 2005 Bayuk L, de Benito M and Ottenheimer A:.PHPlot Reference Manual, 2005
19.
go back to reference Vanderkam D:.Dygraphs Javascript Charting Library, 2006 Vanderkam D:.Dygraphs Javascript Charting Library, 2006
20.
go back to reference Mansfield P: Multi-planar image formation using NMR spin echoes. J Phys C Solid State Phys 10:L55, 1977CrossRef Mansfield P: Multi-planar image formation using NMR spin echoes. J Phys C Solid State Phys 10:L55, 1977CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Dietrich O, Raya JG, Reeder SB, Reiser MF, Schoenberg SO: Measurement of signal‐to‐noise ratios in MR images: influence of multichannel coils, parallel imaging, and reconstruction filters. J Magn Reson Imaging 26:375–385, 2007CrossRefPubMed Dietrich O, Raya JG, Reeder SB, Reiser MF, Schoenberg SO: Measurement of signal‐to‐noise ratios in MR images: influence of multichannel coils, parallel imaging, and reconstruction filters. J Magn Reson Imaging 26:375–385, 2007CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Chen H, Boykin RD, Clarke GD, Gao JT, Roby III, JW: Routine testing of magnetic field homogeneity on clinical MRI systems. Med Phys 33:4299–4306, 2006CrossRefPubMed Chen H, Boykin RD, Clarke GD, Gao JT, Roby III, JW: Routine testing of magnetic field homogeneity on clinical MRI systems. Med Phys 33:4299–4306, 2006CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
An Automatic Image Processing Workflow for Daily Magnetic Resonance Imaging Quality Assurance
Authors
Juha I. Peltonen
Teemu Mäkelä
Alexey Sofiev
Eero Salli
Publication date
01-04-2017
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Journal of Imaging Informatics in Medicine / Issue 2/2017
Print ISSN: 2948-2925
Electronic ISSN: 2948-2933
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-016-9919-4

Other articles of this Issue 2/2017

Journal of Digital Imaging 2/2017 Go to the issue