Hines, Justin

Background/Objectives: White matter (WM) tract detection is critical in the presurgical planning of tumor resection. However, standard-of-care imaging techniques including T1-weighted, T2-weighted, and Diffusion Tensor Imaging (DTI) often fail to identify WM tracts within edematous regions. In T1/T2-weighted imaging, edema increases extracellular water and reduces tissue contrast, and in diffusion-weighted imaging, edema elevates isotropic diffusion, reducing sensitivity to anisotropic diffusion along WM tracts. Advanced biophysical diffusion modeling techniques such as Neurite Orientation Dispersion and Density Imaging (NODDI) and the Standard Model (SM) address this limitation by compartmentalizing the diffusion signal into free-water, intra-neurite, and extra-neurite contributions. Here, we test if biophysical multi-compartment models can robustly identify WM tracts and recover tractography streamlines within edematous regions. Methods: In this study, we use multi-shell diffusion-weighted MRI data obtained from patients with meningiomas—a pathology allowing for isolation of the effects of edema without the confounding effects of tumor cell invasion. We compared FA from standard and free-water-corrected DTI, the orientation dispersion index (ODI) from NODDI, and P2 (a scalar descriptor of fiber orientation coherence) from the SM fODF in edematous and unaffected contralateral WM regions. As a proof of concept, we visually evaluated the tractography performance across models. Results: Our results show that (1 − ODI) and P2 values in edema remained close to within-subject contralateral measurements, contrasting with substantial reductions in FA and FW-FA. (1 − ODI) showed a small but statistically significant increase in edema (~8%, p = 0.02), while P2 was unchanged. Conclusions: These results highlight the potential of biophysical diffusion models for preoperative mapping in edema.

AbstractContent used by Medical Physicists for fluoroscopy safety training to staff is deliverable via several formats, that is, online content or a live audience slide presentations. Here, we share one example of a kinesthetic (live, hands‐on simulation) educational program in use at our facility for some time (~10 years). In this example, the format and content specifically target methods of reducing physician operator exposures from scattered x rays. A kinesthetic format identifies and promotes the adoption of exposure‐reducing behaviors. Key kinesthetic elements of this type of training include: physician hands‐on measurements of radiation levels at locations specific to their standing positions (e.g., primary arterial access points) in the room using handheld exposure rate meters, measurement of exposure rate reduction to physicians provided by using personal protective equipment, that is, wearable aprons, hanging lead drapes, and pull‐down shields. Physician choice of procedure‐specific tableside selectable controls affecting exposure rate from optional fluoroscopy, Cine or digital subtraction angiography (DSA), along with comparative measured contribution to physician exposure is demonstrated. The inverse square exposure rate reduction to physicians when stepping back from the table during DSA is a key observation. Kinesthetic simulations in the rooms used by physicians have been found to provide the highest level of understanding giving rise to adoption of practices that are impactful for physicians. Specific training scripts are in place for physician sub‐specialization in interventional radiology, cardiology, neurosurgery, vascular surgery, and gastroenterology. This training is used for new physician staff while classroom presentations (whose content mimics in room training) are used with staff who have had previously had in room training.