The HML’s New Voxel Phantoms

Kramer, Gary H.; Capello, Kevin; Strocchi, Sabina; Bearrs, Brock; Leung, Kwan; Martínez, Nicole

doi:10.1097/hp.0b013e3182602014

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, it is difficult to replicate the exact anatomy of the dogs used in these experiments. Instead, we used a Doberman body model (Human Monitoring Laboratory model 41 ) that we scaled geometrically to reproduce the weights of the dogs from the experiments.…”

Section: Validationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…40 For the canine simulations, we used the Human Monitoring Laboratory voxel model of an adolescent dog (14 kg, height to withers 44 cm, 20 tissue classes). 41 The Human Monitoring Laboratory model only has a void space for the heart (no description of the atria and ventricles), which we remedied by inserting the atrial and ventricular surfaces of the female Zygote model using scaling, translation, and rotation. We generated five larger canine models from the Human Monitoring Laboratory model by applying geometrical scaling to all tissues/organs, including the heart.…”

Section: Body Models and Cardiac Fiber Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Investigating cardiac stimulation limits of MRI gradient coils using electromagnetic and electrophysiological simulations in human and canine body models

Klein

Davids

Schad

et al. 2020

Magnetic Resonance in Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Cardiac stimulation (CS) limits to gradient coil switching speed are difficult to measure in humans; instead, current regulatory guidelines (IEC 60601‐2‐33) are based on animal experiments and electric field–to‐dB/dt conversion factors computed for a simple, homogeneous body model. We propose improvement to this methodology by using more detailed CS modeling based on realistic body models and electrophysiological models of excitable cardiac fibers. Methods We compute electric fields induced by a solenoid, coplanar loops, and a commercial gradient coil in two human body models and a canine model. The canine simulations mimic previously published experiments. We generate realistic fiber topologies for the cardiac Purkinje and ventricular muscle fiber networks using rule‐based algorithms, and evaluate CS thresholds using validated electrodynamic models of these fibers. Results We were able to reproduce the average measured canine CS thresholds within 5%. In all simulations, the Purkinje fibers were stimulated before the ventricular fibers, and therefore set the effective CS threshold. For the investigated gradient coil, simulated CS thresholds for the x‐, y‐, and z‐axis were at least one order of magnitude greater than the International Electrotechnical Commission limit. Conclusion We demonstrate an approach to simulate gradient‐induced CS using a combination of electromagnetic and electrophysiological modeling. Pending additional validation, these simulations could guide the assessment of CS limits to MRI gradient coil switching speed. Such an approach may lead to less conservative, but still safe, operation limits, enabling the use of the maximum gradient amplitude versus slew rate parameter space of recent, powerful gradient systems.

show abstract

Section: Validationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Body Models and Cardiac Fiber Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating cardiac stimulation limits of MRI gradient coils using electromagnetic and electrophysiological simulations in human and canine body models

Klein

Davids

Schad

et al. 2020

Magnetic Resonance in Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hall, 2011). In addition, a variety of computational anatomical animal models are available that are suitable for dosimetric modelling (Zaidi, 2018), including at least five for canines (Padilla et al., 2008; Kramer et al., 2012; Bell, 2015; Stabin et al., 2015), and many databases exist on the effects of radiation on mammals (e.g. Zander et al., 2019).…”

Section: Basic Concepts Of Radiological Protectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

ICRP Publication 153: Radiological Protection in Veterinary Practice

2022

Ann ICRP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Veterinary use of radiation in the diagnosis, management, and treatment of disease has expanded and diversified, as have the corresponding radiological protection concerns. Radiological exposure of personnel involved in veterinary procedures and, where applicable, members of the public providing assistance (e.g. owners or handlers) has always been included within the system of radiological protection. Veterinary practice is now addressed explicitly as the modern complexities associated with this practice warrant dedicated consideration, and there is a need to clarify and strengthen the application of radiological protection principles in this area. The Commission recommends that the system of radiological protection should be applied in veterinary practice principally for the protection of humans, but with explicit attention to the protection of exposed animals. Additionally, consideration should be given to the risk of potential contamination of the environment associated with applications of nuclear medicine in veterinary practice. This publication focuses primarily on justification and optimisation in veterinary practice, and sets the scene for more detailed guidance to follow in future Recommendations. It is intended for a wide-ranging audience, including radiological protection professionals, veterinary staff, students, education and training providers, and members of the public, as an introduction to radiological protection in veterinary practice. © 2022 ICRP. Published by SAGE.

show abstract

“…Voxel models completed to date and utilized in an environmental context include a crab, flatfish, trout, rat, mouse, and frog (Caffrey and Higley, 2013;Caffrey, 2012;Ruedig et al, 2014b;Stabin et al, 2006;Kinase, 2008). Additional voxel models available to interested researchers include, but are not limited to, Digimouse, and two different canine models (Dogdas et al, 2007;Padilla et al, 2008;Kramer et al, 2012). Additionally, there are two "compromise" options between the basic single ellipsoid models and voxel models that are worth mentioning.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%