Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Image artifacts in fast magnetic resonance imaging.

A Goldmann1, D Chien, R R Edelman

  • 1Department of Radiology, Beth Israel Hospital, Boston, MA 02215.

Topics in Magnetic Resonance Imaging : TMRI
|June 1, 1992
PubMed
Summary

This review examines common visual errors in medical scans that can obscure diagnostic details. It explains why these distortions occur, shows real-world clinical examples, and provides strategies to prevent or reduce their impact on patient care.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

gagCEST imaging at 3 T MRI in patients with articular cartilage lesions of the knee and intraoperative validation.

Osteoarthritis and cartilage·2021
Same author

[EUROCRINE®: adrenal surgery 2015-2019- surprising initial results].

Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen·2020
Same author

Non-Contrast-Enhanced Carotid MRA: Clinical Evaluation of a Novel Ungated Radial Quiescent-Interval Slice-Selective MRA at 1.5T.

AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology·2019
Same author

Advances in non-contrast quiescent-interval slice-selective (QISS) magnetic resonance angiography.

Clinical radiology·2018
Same author

Intraoperative validation of quantitative T2 mapping in patients with articular cartilage lesions of the knee.

Osteoarthritis and cartilage·2017
Same author

Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping in Cerebral Cavernous Malformations: Clinical Correlations.

AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology·2016

Area of Science:

  • Diagnostic radiology and Magnetic Resonance Imaging artifact mitigation
  • Clinical imaging physics and signal processing

Background:

Medical practitioners often encounter visual distortions that complicate the interpretation of diagnostic scans. These unwanted signal patterns frequently obscure anatomical details, leading to potential misdiagnosis or the need for repeat examinations. Prior research has shown that various physical and technical factors contribute to these signal irregularities. That uncertainty drove the need for a comprehensive summary of common imaging errors. No prior work had resolved the full spectrum of causes across diverse clinical settings. This gap motivated a structured examination of how specific acquisition parameters influence image quality. Understanding these phenomena remains a challenge for clinicians aiming to optimize diagnostic accuracy. This article addresses the underlying mechanisms responsible for these spurious signal intensities in modern clinical practice.

Purpose Of The Study:

The aim of this article is to provide a comprehensive overview of signal distortions in medical imaging. This work addresses the persistent challenge of unwanted visual patterns that complicate diagnostic interpretation. The authors seek to clarify the underlying causes of these spurious signal intensities. They intend to bridge the gap between complex physical principles and practical clinical application. This study provides real-world examples to help practitioners identify common imaging errors. The researchers offer evidence-based solutions to avoid these distortions during routine scanning procedures. They aim to improve the reliability of diagnostic outcomes through better technical understanding. This review serves as a guide for clinicians to optimize their imaging protocols effectively.

Keywords:
Signal intensityImage qualityClinical diagnosisScan protocols

Frequently Asked Questions

The researchers propose that spurious signal intensities arise from technical and physical factors during data acquisition. These distortions interfere with clinical diagnosis by obscuring anatomical details, unlike clear images which provide accurate diagnostic information for medical professionals.

The authors identify clinical examples as a key tool for recognizing these distortions. While technical parameters represent the underlying cause, the visual examples serve as a reference for radiologists to distinguish between actual pathology and imaging errors.

The authors suggest that adjusting acquisition protocols is necessary to avoid these signal irregularities. Unlike standard imaging sequences, these modified approaches specifically target the physical sources of distortion to ensure higher quality diagnostic outputs.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Methods:

Review Approach framing involves a systematic survey of literature concerning signal irregularities in medical scans. The authors evaluate documented causes of visual distortions across various clinical environments. Their investigation synthesizes information regarding how specific technical parameters influence final image appearance. This approach relies on comparing established physical principles with observed clinical outcomes. The researchers categorize different types of signal errors to provide a structured overview for practitioners. They examine existing solutions designed to prevent or minimize these unwanted intensities. This methodology emphasizes the practical application of physics knowledge to solve real-world diagnostic challenges. The authors integrate these findings to offer actionable guidance for improving scan quality.

Main Results:

Key Findings From the Literature framing indicates that spurious signal intensities represent a significant barrier to accurate clinical diagnosis. The authors identify that these distortions stem from a variety of technical and physical sources during the scanning process. Their review demonstrates that specific acquisition parameters are directly linked to the formation of these visual anomalies. The findings show that recognizing these patterns allows clinicians to distinguish between true pathology and technical errors. The researchers report that adjusting scan settings can successfully mitigate the severity of these unwanted signals. Their analysis confirms that systematic troubleshooting reduces the necessity for repeat imaging procedures. The evidence suggests that proactive management of these factors improves overall diagnostic confidence. The authors conclude that these signal irregularities are manageable through informed protocol selection and careful technical oversight.

Conclusions:

Synthesis and Implications framing suggests that identifying the root causes of signal distortion is essential for improving diagnostic reliability. The authors propose that clinicians must recognize specific patterns to distinguish between pathology and technical errors. Their review indicates that adjusting acquisition protocols can often mitigate the severity of these visual anomalies. The evidence demonstrates that systematic troubleshooting helps reduce the frequency of repeat scans. Authors highlight that awareness of these issues facilitates better communication between technologists and radiologists. This synthesis confirms that proactive management of imaging parameters enhances overall scan quality. The researchers conclude that ongoing education regarding these phenomena supports safer clinical decision-making. These findings imply that standardized protocols remain the most effective strategy for minimizing diagnostic interference.

The researchers utilize clinical examples as a primary data type to illustrate the impact of these distortions. These visual representations serve a different role than theoretical models, as they demonstrate real-world consequences of signal interference in patient scans.

The authors measure the impact of these phenomena by their ability to interfere with diagnostic interpretation. Unlike quantitative signal-to-noise metrics, this measurement focuses on the qualitative assessment of whether an image remains useful for clinical decision-making.

The researchers propose that standardized protocols represent the most effective strategy for minimizing diagnostic interference. They suggest that this approach offers superior results compared to ad-hoc adjustments, as it provides a consistent framework for technologists to follow across diverse patient populations.