Magnetic resonance imaging datasets with anatomical fiducials for quality control and registration.

Tools available for reproducible, quantitative assessment of brain correspondence have been limited. We previously validated the anatomical fiducial (AFID) placement protocol for point-based assessment of image registration with millimetric (mm) accuracy. In this data descriptor, we release curated AFID placements for some of the most commonly used structural magnetic resonance imaging datasets and templates. The release of our accurate placements allows for rapid quality control of image registration, teaching neuroanatomy, and clinical applications such as disease diagnosis and surgical targeting. We release placements on individual subjects from four datasets (N = 132 subjects for a total of 15,232 fiducials) and 14 brain templates (4,288 fiducials), totalling more than 300 human rater hours of annotation. We also validate human rater accuracy of released placements to be within 1 - 2 mm (using more than 45,000 Euclidean distances), consistent with prior studies. Our data is compliant with the Brain Imaging Data Structure allowing for facile incorporation into neuroimaging analysis pipelines.

Application of the anatomical fiducials framework to a clinical dataset of patients with Parkinson's disease.

Establishing spatial correspondence between subject and template images is necessary in neuroimaging research and clinical applications such as brain mapping and stereotactic neurosurgery. Our anatomical fiducial (AFID) framework has recently been validated to serve as a quantitative measure of image registration based on salient anatomical features. In this study, we sought to apply the AFIDs protocol to the clinic, focusing on structural magnetic resonance images obtained from patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). We confirmed AFIDs could be placed to millimetric accuracy in the PD dataset with results comparable to those in normal control subjects. We evaluated subject-to-template registration using this framework by aligning the clinical scans to standard template space using a robust open preprocessing workflow. We found that registration errors measured using AFIDs were higher than previously reported, suggesting the need for optimization of image processing pipelines for clinical grade datasets. Finally, we examined the utility of using point-to-point distances between AFIDs as a morphometric biomarker of PD, finding evidence of reduced distances between AFIDs that circumscribe regions known to be affected in PD including the substantia nigra. Overall, we provide evidence that AFIDs can be successfully applied in a clinical setting and utilized to provide localized and quantitative measures of registration error. AFIDs provide clinicians and researchers with a common, open framework for quality control and validation of spatial correspondence and the location of anatomical structures, facilitating aggregation of imaging datasets and comparisons between various neurological conditions.