Cargando…

Efficacy of Distortion Correction on Diffusion Imaging: Comparison of FSL Eddy and Eddy_Correct Using 30 and 60 Directions Diffusion Encoding

Diffusion imaging is a unique noninvasive tool to detect brain white matter trajectory and integrity in vivo. However, this technique suffers from spatial distortion and signal pileup or dropout originating from local susceptibility gradients and eddy currents. Although there are several methods to...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yamada, Haruyasu, Abe, Osamu, Shizukuishi, Takashi, Kikuta, Junko, Shinozaki, Takahiro, Dezawa, Ko, Nagano, Akira, Matsuda, Masayuki, Haradome, Hiroki, Imamura, Yoshiki
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4236106/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25405472
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0112411
_version_ 1782345105705795584
author Yamada, Haruyasu
Abe, Osamu
Shizukuishi, Takashi
Kikuta, Junko
Shinozaki, Takahiro
Dezawa, Ko
Nagano, Akira
Matsuda, Masayuki
Haradome, Hiroki
Imamura, Yoshiki
author_facet Yamada, Haruyasu
Abe, Osamu
Shizukuishi, Takashi
Kikuta, Junko
Shinozaki, Takahiro
Dezawa, Ko
Nagano, Akira
Matsuda, Masayuki
Haradome, Hiroki
Imamura, Yoshiki
author_sort Yamada, Haruyasu
collection PubMed
description Diffusion imaging is a unique noninvasive tool to detect brain white matter trajectory and integrity in vivo. However, this technique suffers from spatial distortion and signal pileup or dropout originating from local susceptibility gradients and eddy currents. Although there are several methods to mitigate these problems, most techniques can be applicable either to susceptibility or eddy-current induced distortion alone with a few exceptions. The present study compared the correction efficiency of FSL tools, “eddy_correct” and the combination of “eddy” and “topup” in terms of diffusion-derived fractional anisotropy (FA). The brain diffusion images were acquired from 10 healthy subjects using 30 and 60 directions encoding schemes based on the electrostatic repulsive forces. For the 30 directions encoding, 2 sets of diffusion images were acquired with the same parameters, except for the phase-encode blips which had opposing polarities along the anteroposterior direction. For the 60 directions encoding, non–diffusion-weighted and diffusion-weighted images were obtained with forward phase-encoding blips and non–diffusion-weighted images with the same parameter, except for the phase-encode blips, which had opposing polarities. FA images without and with distortion correction were compared in a voxel-wise manner with tract-based spatial statistics. We showed that images corrected with eddy and topup possessed higher FA values than images uncorrected and corrected with eddy_correct with trilinear (FSL default setting) or spline interpolation in most white matter skeletons, using both encoding schemes. Furthermore, the 60 directions encoding scheme was superior as measured by increased FA values to the 30 directions encoding scheme, despite comparable acquisition time. This study supports the combination of eddy and topup as a superior correction tool in diffusion imaging rather than the eddy_correct tool, especially with trilinear interpolation, using 60 directions encoding scheme.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4236106
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42361062014-11-21 Efficacy of Distortion Correction on Diffusion Imaging: Comparison of FSL Eddy and Eddy_Correct Using 30 and 60 Directions Diffusion Encoding Yamada, Haruyasu Abe, Osamu Shizukuishi, Takashi Kikuta, Junko Shinozaki, Takahiro Dezawa, Ko Nagano, Akira Matsuda, Masayuki Haradome, Hiroki Imamura, Yoshiki PLoS One Research Article Diffusion imaging is a unique noninvasive tool to detect brain white matter trajectory and integrity in vivo. However, this technique suffers from spatial distortion and signal pileup or dropout originating from local susceptibility gradients and eddy currents. Although there are several methods to mitigate these problems, most techniques can be applicable either to susceptibility or eddy-current induced distortion alone with a few exceptions. The present study compared the correction efficiency of FSL tools, “eddy_correct” and the combination of “eddy” and “topup” in terms of diffusion-derived fractional anisotropy (FA). The brain diffusion images were acquired from 10 healthy subjects using 30 and 60 directions encoding schemes based on the electrostatic repulsive forces. For the 30 directions encoding, 2 sets of diffusion images were acquired with the same parameters, except for the phase-encode blips which had opposing polarities along the anteroposterior direction. For the 60 directions encoding, non–diffusion-weighted and diffusion-weighted images were obtained with forward phase-encoding blips and non–diffusion-weighted images with the same parameter, except for the phase-encode blips, which had opposing polarities. FA images without and with distortion correction were compared in a voxel-wise manner with tract-based spatial statistics. We showed that images corrected with eddy and topup possessed higher FA values than images uncorrected and corrected with eddy_correct with trilinear (FSL default setting) or spline interpolation in most white matter skeletons, using both encoding schemes. Furthermore, the 60 directions encoding scheme was superior as measured by increased FA values to the 30 directions encoding scheme, despite comparable acquisition time. This study supports the combination of eddy and topup as a superior correction tool in diffusion imaging rather than the eddy_correct tool, especially with trilinear interpolation, using 60 directions encoding scheme. Public Library of Science 2014-11-18 /pmc/articles/PMC4236106/ /pubmed/25405472 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0112411 Text en © 2014 Yamada et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Yamada, Haruyasu
Abe, Osamu
Shizukuishi, Takashi
Kikuta, Junko
Shinozaki, Takahiro
Dezawa, Ko
Nagano, Akira
Matsuda, Masayuki
Haradome, Hiroki
Imamura, Yoshiki
Efficacy of Distortion Correction on Diffusion Imaging: Comparison of FSL Eddy and Eddy_Correct Using 30 and 60 Directions Diffusion Encoding
title Efficacy of Distortion Correction on Diffusion Imaging: Comparison of FSL Eddy and Eddy_Correct Using 30 and 60 Directions Diffusion Encoding
title_full Efficacy of Distortion Correction on Diffusion Imaging: Comparison of FSL Eddy and Eddy_Correct Using 30 and 60 Directions Diffusion Encoding
title_fullStr Efficacy of Distortion Correction on Diffusion Imaging: Comparison of FSL Eddy and Eddy_Correct Using 30 and 60 Directions Diffusion Encoding
title_full_unstemmed Efficacy of Distortion Correction on Diffusion Imaging: Comparison of FSL Eddy and Eddy_Correct Using 30 and 60 Directions Diffusion Encoding
title_short Efficacy of Distortion Correction on Diffusion Imaging: Comparison of FSL Eddy and Eddy_Correct Using 30 and 60 Directions Diffusion Encoding
title_sort efficacy of distortion correction on diffusion imaging: comparison of fsl eddy and eddy_correct using 30 and 60 directions diffusion encoding
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4236106/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25405472
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0112411
work_keys_str_mv AT yamadaharuyasu efficacyofdistortioncorrectionondiffusionimagingcomparisonoffsleddyandeddycorrectusing30and60directionsdiffusionencoding
AT abeosamu efficacyofdistortioncorrectionondiffusionimagingcomparisonoffsleddyandeddycorrectusing30and60directionsdiffusionencoding
AT shizukuishitakashi efficacyofdistortioncorrectionondiffusionimagingcomparisonoffsleddyandeddycorrectusing30and60directionsdiffusionencoding
AT kikutajunko efficacyofdistortioncorrectionondiffusionimagingcomparisonoffsleddyandeddycorrectusing30and60directionsdiffusionencoding
AT shinozakitakahiro efficacyofdistortioncorrectionondiffusionimagingcomparisonoffsleddyandeddycorrectusing30and60directionsdiffusionencoding
AT dezawako efficacyofdistortioncorrectionondiffusionimagingcomparisonoffsleddyandeddycorrectusing30and60directionsdiffusionencoding
AT naganoakira efficacyofdistortioncorrectionondiffusionimagingcomparisonoffsleddyandeddycorrectusing30and60directionsdiffusionencoding
AT matsudamasayuki efficacyofdistortioncorrectionondiffusionimagingcomparisonoffsleddyandeddycorrectusing30and60directionsdiffusionencoding
AT haradomehiroki efficacyofdistortioncorrectionondiffusionimagingcomparisonoffsleddyandeddycorrectusing30and60directionsdiffusionencoding
AT imamurayoshiki efficacyofdistortioncorrectionondiffusionimagingcomparisonoffsleddyandeddycorrectusing30and60directionsdiffusionencoding