This Article Abstract Full Text Full Text (PDF) Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by MacDougall, N D Articles by Keevil, S F Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by MacDougall, N D Articles by Keevil, S F

Effects of phantom volume and shape on the accuracy of MRI BANG gel dosimetry using BANG3^TM

¹ Division of Imaging Sciences, King's College London, Guy's Campus, London SE1 9RT, ² Clinical Physics, St Bartholomew's Hospital, Barts and the London NHS Trust, London EC1A 7BE, ³ Department of Medical Physics, Guy's Hospital, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London SE1 9RT, UK

View larger version (12K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 1. Variation ofT2 with container size for volumes receiving zero dose or very low dose. For identical shape/volume combinations, at which more than one container was used (test-tubes: 20 points; small cubes: 3 points; medium cubes: 2 points; large cube: 2 points), the mean T2±standard deviation is displayed.

View larger version (15K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 2. Dose response of all containers. Error bars show limits ofR2 precision owing to the MRI scanning protocol.

View larger version (9K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 3. Graph of percent dose error with volume when using test-tubes to convert volume MRI data to radiation dose.

View larger version (13K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 4. Percent dose error when phantom dose distributions are normalized(3 Gy = 100%) at a known dose point.