Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Evaluation of the accuracy and precision of the diffusion parameter EStImation with Gibbs and NoisE removal pipeline.
Ades-Aron, Benjamin; Veraart, Jelle; Kochunov, Peter; McGuire, Stephen; Sherman, Paul; Kellner, Elias; Novikov, Dmitry S; Fieremans, Els.
Afiliação
  • Ades-Aron B; Center for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, New York University School of Medicine, NY, USA. Electronic address: Benjamin.Ades-Aron@nyumc.org.
  • Veraart J; Center for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, New York University School of Medicine, NY, USA. Electronic address: Jelle.Veraart@nyumc.org.
  • Kochunov P; Department of Psychiatry, University of Maryland School of Medicine, MD, USA.
  • McGuire S; U.S. Air Force School of Aerospace Medicine, Aeromedical Research Department, 2510 5th Street, Building 840, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, 45433-7913, USA.
  • Sherman P; U.S. Air Force School of Aerospace Medicine, Aeromedical Research Department, 2510 5th Street, Building 840, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, 45433-7913, USA.
  • Kellner E; Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University Medical Center Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
  • Novikov DS; Center for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, New York University School of Medicine, NY, USA.
  • Fieremans E; Center for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, New York University School of Medicine, NY, USA.
Neuroimage ; 183: 532-543, 2018 12.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30077743
ABSTRACT
This work evaluates the accuracy and precision of the Diffusion parameter EStImation with Gibbs and NoisE Removal (DESIGNER) pipeline, developed to identify and minimize common sources of methodological variability including thermal noise, Gibbs ringing artifacts, Rician bias, EPI and eddy current induced spatial distortions, and motion-related artifacts. Following this processing pipeline, iterative parameter estimation techniques were used to derive diffusion parameters of interest based on the diffusion tensor and kurtosis tensor. We evaluated accuracy using a software phantom based on 36 diffusion datasets from the Human Connectome project and tested the precision by analyzing data from 30 healthy volunteers scanned three times within one week. Preprocessing with both DESIGNER or a standard pipeline based on smoothing (instead of noise removal) improved parameter precision by up to a factor of 2 compared to preprocessing with motion correction alone. When evaluating accuracy, we report average decreases in bias (deviation from simulated parameters) over all included regions for fractional anisotropy, mean diffusivity, mean kurtosis, and axonal water fraction of 9.7%, 8.7%, 4.2%, and 7.6% using DESIGNER compared to the standard pipeline, demonstrating that preprocessing with DESIGNER improves accuracy compared to other processing methods.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Processamento de Imagem Assistida por Computador / Encéfalo / Interpretação de Imagem Assistida por Computador / Imagem de Difusão por Ressonância Magnética / Neuroimagem Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Limite: Adult / Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2018 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Processamento de Imagem Assistida por Computador / Encéfalo / Interpretação de Imagem Assistida por Computador / Imagem de Difusão por Ressonância Magnética / Neuroimagem Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Limite: Adult / Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2018 Tipo de documento: Article