The inter-site and intra-site variability of system performance of MRI scanners (due to site-dependent and time-variant variations) can have significant adverse effects on the integration of multi-center DTI data. Measurement errors in accuracy and precision of each acquisition determine both the inter-site and intra-site variability. In this study, multiple scans of an identical isotropic diffusion phantom and of the brain of a traveling human volunteer were acquired at MRI scanners from the same vendor and with similar configurations at three sites. We assessed the feasibility of multi-center DTI studies by direct quantification of accuracy and precision of each dataset. Accuracy was quantified via comparison to carefully constructed gold standard datasets while precision (the within-scan variability) was estimated by wild bootstrap analysis. The results from both the phantom and human data suggest that the inter-site variation in system performance, although relatively small among scanners of the same vendor, significantly affects DTI measurement accuracy and precision and therefore the effectiveness for the integration of multi-center DTI measurements. Our results also highlight the value of a DTI-specific phantom in identifying and quantifying measurement errors due to site-dependent variations in the system performance, and its usefulness for quality assurance/quality control in multi-center DTI studies. In addition, we observed that the within-scan variability of each data acquisition, as assessed by wild bootstrap analysis, is of the same magnitude as the inter-site and intra-site variability. We propose that by weighing datasets based on their variability, as evaluated by wild bootstrap analysis, one can improve the quality of the dataset. This approach will provide a more effective integration of datasets from multi-center DTI studies.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3085553 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.02.010 | DOI Listing |
Neuroimage Clin
November 2024
Department of Electrical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, Groene Loper 19, 5612 AE Eindhoven, the Netherlands; Department of Research and Development, Epilepsy Centre Kempenhaeghe, Sterkselseweg 65, 5590 AB Heeze, the Netherlands.
Front Neurol
July 2024
Department of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Center for Prevention and Rehabilitation, Heart Vascular Stroke Institute, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Background: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is widely used therapy to enhance motor deficit in stroke patients. To date, rTMS protocols used in stroke patients are relatively unified. However, as the pathophysiology of stroke is diverse and individual functional deficits are distinctive, more precise application of rTMS is warranted.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBMC Pediatr
June 2024
Department of Neonatology, Wilhelmina Children's Hospital, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Background: Preterm born infants are at risk for brain injury and subsequent developmental delay. Treatment options are limited, but optimizing postnatal nutrition may improve brain- and neurodevelopment in these infants. In pre-clinical animal models, combined supplementation of docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), choline, and uridine-5-monophosphate (UMP) have shown to support neuronal membrane formation.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFbioRxiv
May 2024
Division of Clinical Behavioral Neuroscience, Department of Pediatrics, Masonic Institute for the Developing Brain, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Magn Reson Med
July 2024
Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Purpose: To reduce the inter-scanner variability of diffusion MRI (dMRI) measures between scanners from different vendors by developing a vendor-neutral dMRI pulse sequence using the open-source vendor-agnostic Pulseq platform.
Methods: We implemented a standard EPI based dMRI sequence in Pulseq. We tested it on two clinical scanners from different vendors (Siemens Prisma and GE Premier), systematically evaluating and comparing the within- and inter-scanner variability across the vendors, using both the vendor-provided and Pulseq dMRI sequences.
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!