OBJECTIVE: To compare the accuracy of stereotactic localization using magnetic resonance imaging (Siemens 1.5-T Magnetom; Siemens, Erlangen, Germany) with two-dimensional and three-dimensional data acquisition techniques. METHODS: A phantom study was performed in which the coordinates of an array of rods were determined from images in both two-dimensional and three-dimensional studies and compared with measured values in a series of transverse, coronal, and sagittal images. RESULTS: The results demonstrated a distinct advantage in using three-dimensional acquisition; an error greater than 2 mm was identified in only 0.8% of the imaged volume, compared with 12% of the imaged volume in the two-dimensional study. CONCLUSION: The results indicated that more accurate stereotactic localization is achieved with a three-dimensional acquisition.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Walton et al. (1997) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: