Cargando…

Identical, but not the same: Intra-site and inter-site reproducibility of fractional anisotropy measures on two 3.0 T scanners

Diffusion Tensor Imaging (DTI) is being increasingly used to assess white matter integrity and it is therefore paramount to address the test–retest reliability of DTI measures. In this study we assessed inter- and intra-site reproducibility of two nominally identical 3 T scanners at different sites...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vollmar, Christian, O'Muircheartaigh, Jonathan, Barker, Gareth J., Symms, Mark R., Thompson, Pamela, Kumari, Veena, Duncan, John S., Richardson, Mark P., Koepp, Matthias J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Academic Press 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3163823/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20338248
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.03.046
_version_ 1782210989720076288
author Vollmar, Christian
O'Muircheartaigh, Jonathan
Barker, Gareth J.
Symms, Mark R.
Thompson, Pamela
Kumari, Veena
Duncan, John S.
Richardson, Mark P.
Koepp, Matthias J.
author_facet Vollmar, Christian
O'Muircheartaigh, Jonathan
Barker, Gareth J.
Symms, Mark R.
Thompson, Pamela
Kumari, Veena
Duncan, John S.
Richardson, Mark P.
Koepp, Matthias J.
author_sort Vollmar, Christian
collection PubMed
description Diffusion Tensor Imaging (DTI) is being increasingly used to assess white matter integrity and it is therefore paramount to address the test–retest reliability of DTI measures. In this study we assessed inter- and intra-site reproducibility of two nominally identical 3 T scanners at different sites in nine healthy controls using a DTI protocol representative of typical current “best practice” including cardiac gating, a multichannel head coil, parallel imaging and optimized diffusion gradient parameters. We calculated coefficients of variation (CV) and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) of fractional anisotropy (FA) measures for the whole brain, for three regions of interest (ROI) and for three tracts derived from these ROI by probabilistic tracking. We assessed the impact of affine, nonlinear and template based methods for spatially aligning FA maps on the reproducibility. The intra-site CV for FA ranged from 0.8% to 3.0% with ICC from 0.90 to 0.99, while the inter-site CV ranged from 1.0% to 4.1% with ICC of 0.82 to 0.99. Nonlinear image coregistration improved reproducibility compared to affine coregistration. Normalization to template space reduced the between-subject variation, resulting in lower ICC values and indicating a possibly reduced sensitivity. CV from probabilistic tractography were about 50% higher than for the corresponding seed ROI. Reproducibility maps of the whole scan volume showed a low variation of less than 5% in the major white matter tracts but higher variations of 10–15% in gray matter regions. One of the two scanners showed better intra-site reproducibility, while the intra-site CV for both scanners was significantly better than inter-site CV. However, when using nonlinear coregistration of FA maps, the average inter-site CV was below 2%. There was a consistent inter-site bias, FA values on site 2 were 1.0–1.5% lower than on site 1. Correction for this bias with a global scaling factor reduced the inter-site CV to the range of intra-site CV. Our results are encouraging for multi-centre DTI studies in larger populations, but also illustrate the importance of the image processing pipeline for reproducibility.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3163823
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher Academic Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-31638232011-09-27 Identical, but not the same: Intra-site and inter-site reproducibility of fractional anisotropy measures on two 3.0 T scanners Vollmar, Christian O'Muircheartaigh, Jonathan Barker, Gareth J. Symms, Mark R. Thompson, Pamela Kumari, Veena Duncan, John S. Richardson, Mark P. Koepp, Matthias J. Neuroimage Article Diffusion Tensor Imaging (DTI) is being increasingly used to assess white matter integrity and it is therefore paramount to address the test–retest reliability of DTI measures. In this study we assessed inter- and intra-site reproducibility of two nominally identical 3 T scanners at different sites in nine healthy controls using a DTI protocol representative of typical current “best practice” including cardiac gating, a multichannel head coil, parallel imaging and optimized diffusion gradient parameters. We calculated coefficients of variation (CV) and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) of fractional anisotropy (FA) measures for the whole brain, for three regions of interest (ROI) and for three tracts derived from these ROI by probabilistic tracking. We assessed the impact of affine, nonlinear and template based methods for spatially aligning FA maps on the reproducibility. The intra-site CV for FA ranged from 0.8% to 3.0% with ICC from 0.90 to 0.99, while the inter-site CV ranged from 1.0% to 4.1% with ICC of 0.82 to 0.99. Nonlinear image coregistration improved reproducibility compared to affine coregistration. Normalization to template space reduced the between-subject variation, resulting in lower ICC values and indicating a possibly reduced sensitivity. CV from probabilistic tractography were about 50% higher than for the corresponding seed ROI. Reproducibility maps of the whole scan volume showed a low variation of less than 5% in the major white matter tracts but higher variations of 10–15% in gray matter regions. One of the two scanners showed better intra-site reproducibility, while the intra-site CV for both scanners was significantly better than inter-site CV. However, when using nonlinear coregistration of FA maps, the average inter-site CV was below 2%. There was a consistent inter-site bias, FA values on site 2 were 1.0–1.5% lower than on site 1. Correction for this bias with a global scaling factor reduced the inter-site CV to the range of intra-site CV. Our results are encouraging for multi-centre DTI studies in larger populations, but also illustrate the importance of the image processing pipeline for reproducibility. Academic Press 2010-07-15 /pmc/articles/PMC3163823/ /pubmed/20338248 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.03.046 Text en © 2010 Elsevier Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ Open Access under CC BY 3.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) license
spellingShingle Article
Vollmar, Christian
O'Muircheartaigh, Jonathan
Barker, Gareth J.
Symms, Mark R.
Thompson, Pamela
Kumari, Veena
Duncan, John S.
Richardson, Mark P.
Koepp, Matthias J.
Identical, but not the same: Intra-site and inter-site reproducibility of fractional anisotropy measures on two 3.0 T scanners
title Identical, but not the same: Intra-site and inter-site reproducibility of fractional anisotropy measures on two 3.0 T scanners
title_full Identical, but not the same: Intra-site and inter-site reproducibility of fractional anisotropy measures on two 3.0 T scanners
title_fullStr Identical, but not the same: Intra-site and inter-site reproducibility of fractional anisotropy measures on two 3.0 T scanners
title_full_unstemmed Identical, but not the same: Intra-site and inter-site reproducibility of fractional anisotropy measures on two 3.0 T scanners
title_short Identical, but not the same: Intra-site and inter-site reproducibility of fractional anisotropy measures on two 3.0 T scanners
title_sort identical, but not the same: intra-site and inter-site reproducibility of fractional anisotropy measures on two 3.0 t scanners
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3163823/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20338248
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.03.046
work_keys_str_mv AT vollmarchristian identicalbutnotthesameintrasiteandintersitereproducibilityoffractionalanisotropymeasuresontwo30tscanners
AT omuircheartaighjonathan identicalbutnotthesameintrasiteandintersitereproducibilityoffractionalanisotropymeasuresontwo30tscanners
AT barkergarethj identicalbutnotthesameintrasiteandintersitereproducibilityoffractionalanisotropymeasuresontwo30tscanners
AT symmsmarkr identicalbutnotthesameintrasiteandintersitereproducibilityoffractionalanisotropymeasuresontwo30tscanners
AT thompsonpamela identicalbutnotthesameintrasiteandintersitereproducibilityoffractionalanisotropymeasuresontwo30tscanners
AT kumariveena identicalbutnotthesameintrasiteandintersitereproducibilityoffractionalanisotropymeasuresontwo30tscanners
AT duncanjohns identicalbutnotthesameintrasiteandintersitereproducibilityoffractionalanisotropymeasuresontwo30tscanners
AT richardsonmarkp identicalbutnotthesameintrasiteandintersitereproducibilityoffractionalanisotropymeasuresontwo30tscanners
AT koeppmatthiasj identicalbutnotthesameintrasiteandintersitereproducibilityoffractionalanisotropymeasuresontwo30tscanners