Glenn G R, Kuo L-W, Chao Y-P, Lee C-Y, Helpern J A, Jensen J H
From the Center for Biomedical Imaging (G.R.G., C.-Y.L., J.A.H., J.H.J.) Department of Neurosciences (G.R.G., J.A.H.) Department of Radiology and Radiological Science (G.R.G., C.-Y.L., J.A.H., J.H.J.), Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina.
Institute of Biomedical Engineering and Nanomedicine (L.-W.K.), National Health Research Institutes, Miaoli County, Taiwan
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2016 Jul;37(7):1216-22. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A4714. Epub 2016 Mar 3.
White matter fiber tractography relies on fiber bundle orientation estimates from diffusion MR imaging. However, clinically feasible techniques such as DTI and diffusional kurtosis imaging use assumptions, which may introduce error into in vivo orientation estimates. In this study, fiber bundle orientations from DTI and diffusional kurtosis imaging are compared with diffusion spectrum imaging as a criterion standard to assess the performance of each technique.
For each subject, full DTI, diffusional kurtosis imaging, and diffusion spectrum imaging datasets were acquired during 2 independent sessions, and fiber bundle orientations were estimated by using the specific theoretic assumptions of each technique. Angular variability and angular error measures were assessed by comparing the orientation estimates. Tractography generated with each of the 3 reconstructions was also examined and contrasted.
Orientation estimates from all 3 techniques had comparable angular reproducibility, but diffusional kurtosis imaging decreased angular error throughout the white matter compared with DTI. Diffusion spectrum imaging and diffusional kurtosis imaging enabled the detection of crossing-fiber bundles, which had pronounced effects on tractography relative to DTI. Diffusion spectrum imaging had the highest sensitivity for detecting crossing fibers; however, the diffusion spectrum imaging and diffusional kurtosis imaging tracts were qualitatively similar.
Fiber bundle orientation estimates from diffusional kurtosis imaging have less systematic error than those from DTI, which can noticeably affect tractography. Moreover, tractography obtained with diffusional kurtosis imaging is qualitatively comparable with that of diffusion spectrum imaging. Because diffusional kurtosis imaging has a shorter typical scan time than diffusion spectrum imaging, diffusional kurtosis imaging is potentially more suitable for a variety of clinical and research applications.
白质纤维束成像依赖于磁共振扩散成像(MRI)的纤维束方向估计。然而,诸如扩散张量成像(DTI)和扩散峰度成像等临床可行技术使用的假设可能会给体内方向估计引入误差。在本研究中,将DTI和扩散峰度成像的纤维束方向与扩散谱成像(作为标准)进行比较,以评估每种技术的性能。
对每位受试者在2次独立检查期间采集完整的DTI、扩散峰度成像和扩散谱成像数据集,并使用每种技术的特定理论假设估计纤维束方向。通过比较方向估计值来评估角度变异性和角度误差测量值。还对由这3种重建方法生成的纤维束成像进行了检查和对比。
所有3种技术的方向估计具有可比的角度可重复性,但与DTI相比,扩散峰度成像在整个白质中降低了角度误差。扩散谱成像和扩散峰度成像能够检测交叉纤维束,这相对于DTI对纤维束成像有显著影响。扩散谱成像检测交叉纤维的灵敏度最高;然而,扩散谱成像和扩散峰度成像的纤维束在质量上相似。
扩散峰度成像的纤维束方向估计比DTI的系统误差更小,而DTI可能会显著影响纤维束成像。此外,扩散峰度成像获得的纤维束成像在质量上与扩散谱成像相当。由于扩散峰度成像的典型扫描时间比扩散谱成像短,因此扩散峰度成像可能更适合各种临床和研究应用。