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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |