Cargando…
Inter‐station intensity standardization for whole‐body MR data
PURPOSE: To develop and validate a method for performing inter‐station intensity standardization in multispectral whole‐body MR data. METHODS: Different approaches for mapping the intensity of each acquired image stack into the reference intensity space were developed and validated. The registration...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5217098/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26834001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mrm.26098 |
_version_ | 1782492043959861248 |
---|---|
author | Dzyubachyk, Oleh Staring, Marius Reijnierse, Monique Lelieveldt, Boudewijn P. F. van der Geest, Rob J. |
author_facet | Dzyubachyk, Oleh Staring, Marius Reijnierse, Monique Lelieveldt, Boudewijn P. F. van der Geest, Rob J. |
author_sort | Dzyubachyk, Oleh |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: To develop and validate a method for performing inter‐station intensity standardization in multispectral whole‐body MR data. METHODS: Different approaches for mapping the intensity of each acquired image stack into the reference intensity space were developed and validated. The registration strategies included: “direct” registration to the reference station (Strategy 1), “progressive” registration to the neighboring stations without (Strategy 2), and with (Strategy 3) using information from the overlap regions of the neighboring stations. For Strategy 3, two regularized modifications were proposed and validated. All methods were tested on two multispectral whole‐body MR data sets: a multiple myeloma patients data set (48 subjects) and a whole‐body MR angiography data set (33 subjects). RESULTS: For both data sets, all strategies showed significant improvement of intensity homogeneity with respect to vast majority of the validation measures (P < 0.005). Strategy 1 exhibited the best performance, closely followed by Strategy 2. Strategy 3 and its modifications were performing worse, in majority of the cases significantly (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: We propose several strategies for performing inter‐station intensity standardization in multispectral whole‐body MR data. All the strategies were successfully applied to two types of whole‐body MR data, and the “direct” registration strategy was concluded to perform the best. Magn Reson Med 77:422–433, 2017. © 2016 The Authors Magnetic Resonance in Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5217098 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-52170982017-01-18 Inter‐station intensity standardization for whole‐body MR data Dzyubachyk, Oleh Staring, Marius Reijnierse, Monique Lelieveldt, Boudewijn P. F. van der Geest, Rob J. Magn Reson Med Computer Processing and Modeling—Full Papers PURPOSE: To develop and validate a method for performing inter‐station intensity standardization in multispectral whole‐body MR data. METHODS: Different approaches for mapping the intensity of each acquired image stack into the reference intensity space were developed and validated. The registration strategies included: “direct” registration to the reference station (Strategy 1), “progressive” registration to the neighboring stations without (Strategy 2), and with (Strategy 3) using information from the overlap regions of the neighboring stations. For Strategy 3, two regularized modifications were proposed and validated. All methods were tested on two multispectral whole‐body MR data sets: a multiple myeloma patients data set (48 subjects) and a whole‐body MR angiography data set (33 subjects). RESULTS: For both data sets, all strategies showed significant improvement of intensity homogeneity with respect to vast majority of the validation measures (P < 0.005). Strategy 1 exhibited the best performance, closely followed by Strategy 2. Strategy 3 and its modifications were performing worse, in majority of the cases significantly (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: We propose several strategies for performing inter‐station intensity standardization in multispectral whole‐body MR data. All the strategies were successfully applied to two types of whole‐body MR data, and the “direct” registration strategy was concluded to perform the best. Magn Reson Med 77:422–433, 2017. © 2016 The Authors Magnetic Resonance in Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016-02-01 2017-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5217098/ /pubmed/26834001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mrm.26098 Text en © 2016 The Authors Magnetic Resonance in Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial‐NoDerivs (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Computer Processing and Modeling—Full Papers Dzyubachyk, Oleh Staring, Marius Reijnierse, Monique Lelieveldt, Boudewijn P. F. van der Geest, Rob J. Inter‐station intensity standardization for whole‐body MR data |
title | Inter‐station intensity standardization for whole‐body MR data |
title_full | Inter‐station intensity standardization for whole‐body MR data |
title_fullStr | Inter‐station intensity standardization for whole‐body MR data |
title_full_unstemmed | Inter‐station intensity standardization for whole‐body MR data |
title_short | Inter‐station intensity standardization for whole‐body MR data |
title_sort | inter‐station intensity standardization for whole‐body mr data |
topic | Computer Processing and Modeling—Full Papers |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5217098/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26834001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mrm.26098 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dzyubachykoleh interstationintensitystandardizationforwholebodymrdata AT staringmarius interstationintensitystandardizationforwholebodymrdata AT reijniersemonique interstationintensitystandardizationforwholebodymrdata AT lelieveldtboudewijnpf interstationintensitystandardizationforwholebodymrdata AT vandergeestrobj interstationintensitystandardizationforwholebodymrdata |