Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 19, 2026
Manufacturing Abdominal Aorta Hydrogel Tissue-Mimicking Phantoms for Ultrasound Elastography Validation
Published on: September 19, 2018
Phantom validation of quantitative susceptibility and dynamic contrast-enhanced permeability MR sequences across
Nicholas Hobson1, Sean P Polster1, Ying Cao1
1Neurovascular Surgery Program, Section of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, University of Chicago Medicine and Biological Sciences, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Background:
Quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) and dynamic contrast-enhanced quantitative permeability (DCEQP) on magnetic resonance (MR) have been shown to correlate with neurovascular disease progression as markers of vascular leakage and hemosiderin deposition. Applying these techniques as monitoring biomarkers in clinical trials will be necessary; however, their validation across multiple MR platforms and institutions has not been rigorously verified.
Purpose:
To validate quantitative measurement of MR biomarkers on multiple instruments at different institutions.
Study Type:
Phantom validation between platforms and institutions.
Phantom Model:
T1 /susceptibility phantom, two-compartment dynamic flow phantom.
Field Strength/Sequence:
3T/QSM, T1 mapping, dynamic 2D SPGR.
Assessment:
Philips Ingenia, Siemens Prisma, and Siemens Skyra at three different institutions were assessed. A QSM phantom with concentrations of gadolinium, corresponding to magnetic susceptibilities of 0, 0.1, 0.2, 0.4, and 0.8 ppm was assayed. DCEQP was assessed by measuring a MultiHance bolus as the consistency of the width ratio of the curves at the input and outputs over a range of flow ratios between outputs.
Statistical Tests:
Each biomarker was assessed by measures of accuracy (Pearson correlation), precision (paired t-test between repeated measurements), and reproducibility (analysis of covariance [ANCOVA] between instruments).
Results:
QSM accuracy of r2 > 0.997 on all three platforms was measured. Precision (P = 0.66 Achieva, P = 0.76 Prisma, P = 0.69 Skyra) and reproducibility (P = 0.89) were good. T1 mapping of accuracy was r2 > 0.98. No significant difference between width ratio regression slopes at site 2 (P = 0.669) or site 3 (P = 0.305), and no significant difference between width ratio regression slopes between sites was detected by ANCOVA (P = 0.48).
Data Conclusion:
The phantom performed as expected and determined that MR measures of QSM and DCEQP are accurate and consistent across repeated measurements and between platforms.
Level Of Evidence:
1 Technical Efficacy Stage: 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2020;51:1192-1199.
Related Concept Videos
01:31Magnetic Susceptibility and Permeability
When diamagnetic materials are placed under an external magnetic field, the moments opposite to the field are induced. Hence, the susceptibility for diamagnets has a minimal negative value of 10-5–10-6. Since...
09:32Manufacturing Abdominal Aorta Hydrogel Tissue-Mimicking Phantoms for Ultrasound Elastography Validation
07:59Fat-Water Phantoms for Magnetic Resonance Imaging Validation: A Flexible and Scalable Protocol
06:24Dynamic Contrast Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging of an Orthotopic Pancreatic Cancer Mouse Model
08:41Patient-Specific Polyvinyl Alcohol Phantom Fabrication with Ultrasound and X-Ray Contrast for Brain Tumor Surgery Planning
05:50Contrast Enhanced Vessel Imaging using MicroCT