Magnetic Resonance in MedicineBiophysicsPeer-reviewed journal article
Evaluation of phantom doping materials in quantitative susceptibility mapping
Padriac HooperiD, Jin JiniD, Kieran O’BrieniD, Monique C. TourelliD, Simon RobinsoniD, Markus BarthiD
Abstract
PurposeTo measure magnetic susceptibility ({chi}) with Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping (QSM) and evaluate its repeatability using four phantom doping materials relevant to QSM applications. MethodsA cylindrical phantom was constructed containing vials of agarose gel doped with two paramagnetic materials (ferritin, USPIO) and two diamagnetic materials (CaCl2, CaCO3) at five concentrations each. Single orientation QSM measurements (MEDI+0) were carried out on the phantom at 3T and 7T. We measured molar susceptibility ({chi}mol) from QSM and evaluated the test-retest repeatability of {chi} using the standard error of the measurement (SEM). We evaluated material lifespan by conducting a t-test of {chi}mol at various timepoints. Results{chi}mol (ppm{middle dot}L{middle dot}mmol-1) were measured as 1.67 {+/-} 0.24 and 0.74 {+/-} 0.09 (USPIO: 3T and 7T, respectively), 10-2x(8.13 {+/-} 1.35; 8.13 {+/-} 1.19) (Ferritin: 3T; 7T), 10-4x(-2.68 {+/-} 0.24; -2.71 {+/-} 0.37) (CaCl2: 3T; 7T), and 10-5x(-9.52 {+/-} 1.44; -9.53 {+/-} 1.18) (CaCO3: 3T; 7T). The USPIO SEM (1.5 {+/-} 2.0; 5.1 {+/-} 2.0 ppb at 3T; 7T) was greater than the ferritin SEM (1.2 {+/-} 1.0; 2.2 {+/-} 1.3 ppb at 3T; 7T). The CaCl2 SEM (7.5 {+/-} 5.5; 1.2 {+/-} 0.6 ppb at 3T; 7T) was greater than the CaCO3 SEM (1.2 {+/-} 0.6; 0.9 {+/-} 0.7 ppb at 3T; 7T). We observed no significant changes in molar susceptibility for ferritin and CaCO3 over the measured timeframes (24 months and 15 months, respectively). ConclusionWe recommend using ferritin and CaCO3 in the construction of susceptibility phantoms, removing later echo times for CaCO3 QSM reconstructions.
- Citations
- 1
- FWCI
- 3.03
- Field percentile
- top 17%
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- A geometric anthropomorphic phantom for quantitative susceptibility mapping: accuracy and repeatability
Padriac Hooper, Jin Jin, … Markus Barth·bioRxiv·Sep 2, 2026
- QSM Reconstruction Challenge 2.0: a realistic in silico head phantom for MRI data simulation and evaluation of susceptibility mapping procedures
José P. Marques, Jakob Meineke, … Ferdinand Schweser·Magnetic Resonance in MedicinePeer-reviewed·Feb 26, 2021
- Validation of Data Acquisition and Phase Estimation for Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping with a Rotating-Tube Phantom
K. E. Keenan, B. P. Berman, … J. Dagher·bioRxiv·Jun 29, 2021
- A realistic in-silico brain phantom for quantifying susceptibility anisotropy-induced error in susceptibility separation
Daniel Ridani, Benjamin De Leener, Eva Alonso‐Ortiz·Magnetic Resonance in MedicinePeer-reviewed·Jul 9, 2026
- APART-QSM: an improved sub-voxel quantitative susceptibility mapping for susceptibility source separation using an iterative data fitting method
Zhenghao Li, Ruimin Feng, … Hongjiang Wei·NeuroImagePeer-reviewed·Apr 29, 2023
- Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping for Differentiating Hydroxyapatite and Calcium Oxalate Breast Calcifications at 3T: A Phantom Study
Klara Misak, Enrico De Vita, … Simon Walker‐Samuel·bioRxiv·Sep 27, 2026