A quantitative comparison of two methods to correct eddy current-induced distortions in DT-MRI

被引:14
作者
Munoz Maniega, Susana [1 ]
Bastin, Mark E. [1 ]
Armitage, Paul A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Edinburgh, Western Gen Hosp, Edinburgh EH4 2XU, Midlothian, Scotland
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
magnetic resonance imaging; diffusion tensor; eddy currents; image registration; principal component analysis;
D O I
10.1016/j.mri.2006.09.009
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Eddy current-induced geometric distortions of single-shot, diffusion-weighted, echo-planar (DW-EP) images are a major confounding factor to the accurate determination of water diffusion parameters in diffusion tensor MRI (DT-MRI). Previously, it has been suggested that these geometric distortions can be removed from brain DW-EP images using affine transformations determined from phantom calibration experiments using iterative cross-correlation (ICC). Since this approach was first described, a number of image-based registration methods have become available that can also correct eddy current-induced distortions in DW-EP images. However, as yet no study has investigated whether separate eddy current calibration or image-based registration provides the most accurate way of retrieving these artefacts from DT-MRI data. Here we compare how ICC phantom calibration and affine FLIRT (http://www.fmrib.ox.ac.uk), a popular image-based multimodal registration method that can correct both eddy current-induced distortions and bulk subject motion, perform when registering DW-EP images acquired with different slice thicknesses (2.8 and 5 mm) and b-values (1000 and 3000 s/mm(2)). With the use of consistency testing, it was found that ICC was a more robust algorithm for correcting eddy current-induced distortions than affine FLIRT, especially at high b-value and small slice thickness. In addition, principal component analysis demonstrated that the combination of ICC phantom calibration (to remove eddy current-induced distortions) with rigid body FLIRT (to remove bulk subject motion) provided a more accurate registration of DT-MRI data than that achieved by affine FLIRT. (c) 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:341 / 349
页数:9
相关论文
共 26 条
[11]   Mapping eddy current induced fields for the correction of diffusion-weighted echo planar images [J].
Horsfield, MA .
MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 1999, 17 (09) :1335-1345
[12]   A global optimisation method for robust affine registration of brain images [J].
Jenkinson, M ;
Smith, S .
MEDICAL IMAGE ANALYSIS, 2001, 5 (02) :143-156
[13]   Characterization of and correction for eddy current artifacts in echo planar diffusion imaging [J].
Jezzard, P ;
Barnett, AS ;
Pierpaoli, C .
MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICINE, 1998, 39 (05) :801-812
[14]  
Jolliffe I.T., 2002, PRINCIPAL COMPONENTS
[15]   The effect of gradient sampling schemes on measures derived from diffusion tensor MRI: A Monte Carlo study [J].
Jones, DK .
MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICINE, 2004, 51 (04) :807-815
[16]  
Koch M, 2000, PHYS MED BIOL, V45, P3821, DOI 10.1088/0031-9155/45/12/322
[17]   Distortion correction and robust tensor estimation for MR diffusion imaging [J].
Mangin, JF ;
Poupon, C ;
Clark, C ;
Le Bihan, D ;
Bloch, I .
MEDICAL IMAGE ANALYSIS, 2002, 6 (03) :191-198
[18]   Quantitative evaluation of image-based distortion correction in diffusion tensor imaging [J].
Netsch, T ;
van Muiswinkel, A .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MEDICAL IMAGING, 2004, 23 (07) :789-798
[19]  
Netsch T, 2003, LECT NOTES COMPUT SC, V2717, P171
[20]   Affine and polynomial mutual information coregistration for artifact elimination in diffusion tensor imaging of newborns [J].
Nielsen, JF ;
Ghugre, NR ;
Panigrahy, A .
MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2004, 22 (09) :1319-1323