Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 1992 Mar;30(3):402-6; discussion 406-7.
doi: 10.1227/00006123-199203000-00015.

A comparison between magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography for stereotactic coordinate determination

Affiliations
Comparative Study

A comparison between magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography for stereotactic coordinate determination

D Kondziolka et al. Neurosurgery. 1992 Mar.

Abstract

The spatial accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has not been established for stereotactic surgery. Magnetic susceptibility artifacts may lead to anatomical distortion and inaccurate stereotactic MRI coordinates, especially when targets are in regions of the brain out of the center of the magnetic field. MRI-guided stereotactic localization, however, provides better multiplanar target resolution than is available with computed tomographic (CT) scanning. Therefore, we compared the accuracy of stereotactic coordinates determined by MRI and CT studies in 41 patients (53 targets). Coordinates were measured in each plane and as vector distances between the target and the center of the stereotactic frame on axial or coronal MRI studies. Absolute axial plane MRI and CT distances varied an average of 2.13 +/- 1.59 mm. The mean difference in measurements in the X (left-right) dimension was 1.19 mm and 1.55 mm in the Y (anterior-posterior) dimension. Central targets (located less than 2 cm from the frame center) had a mean MRI-CT difference of 2.09 +/- 1.79 mm; peripheral targets (greater than 2 cm from the frame center) differed by 2.17 +/- 1.3 mm. The voxel volumes were calculated for all compared images. Although differences between the physical properties of data acquisition with each imaging modality could explain the observed CT-MRI discrepancies, a 1-pixel difference in target selection could account totally for all the variance observed. MRI field strength (0.5 vs. 1.5 T) did not correlate with coordinate determination accuracy. We conclude that MRI-guided stereotactic localization can be used with confidence for most diagnostic, functional, and therapeutic stereotactic procedures.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types