Cargando…

Evaluating corrections for Eddy‐currents and other EPI distortions in diffusion MRI: methodology and a dataset for benchmarking

PURPOSE: To propose a methodology for assessment of algorithms that correct distortions due to motion, eddy‐currents, and echo planar imaging in diffusion weighted images (DWIs). METHODS: The proposed method evaluates correction performance by measuring variability across datasets of the same object...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Irfanoglu, M. Okan, Sarlls, Joelle, Nayak, Amritha, Pierpaoli, Carlo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6518940/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30394561
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mrm.27577
_version_ 1783418554302857216
author Irfanoglu, M. Okan
Sarlls, Joelle
Nayak, Amritha
Pierpaoli, Carlo
author_facet Irfanoglu, M. Okan
Sarlls, Joelle
Nayak, Amritha
Pierpaoli, Carlo
author_sort Irfanoglu, M. Okan
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To propose a methodology for assessment of algorithms that correct distortions due to motion, eddy‐currents, and echo planar imaging in diffusion weighted images (DWIs). METHODS: The proposed method evaluates correction performance by measuring variability across datasets of the same object acquired with images having distortions in different directions, thereby overcoming the unavailability of ground‐truth, undistorted DWIs. A comprehensive diffusion MRI dataset, collected using a suitable experimental design, is made available to the scientific community, consisting of three DWI shells (Bmax = 5000 s/mm(2)), 30 gradient directions, a replicate set of antipodal gradient directions, four phase‐encoding directions, and three different head orientations. The proposed methodology was tested using the TORTOISE diffusion MRI processing pipeline. RESULTS: The median variability of the original distorted data was 123% higher for DWIs, 100–168% higher for tensor‐derived metrics and 28–111% higher for MAPMRI metrics, than in the corrected versions. EPI distortions induced substantial variability, nearly comparable to the contribution of eddy‐current distortions. CONCLUSIONS: The dataset and the evaluation strategy proposed herein enable quantitative comparison of different methods for correction of distortions due to motion, eddy‐currents, and other EPI distortions, and can be useful in benchmarking newly developed algorithms.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6518940
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65189402019-05-21 Evaluating corrections for Eddy‐currents and other EPI distortions in diffusion MRI: methodology and a dataset for benchmarking Irfanoglu, M. Okan Sarlls, Joelle Nayak, Amritha Pierpaoli, Carlo Magn Reson Med Full Papers—Computer Processing and Modeling PURPOSE: To propose a methodology for assessment of algorithms that correct distortions due to motion, eddy‐currents, and echo planar imaging in diffusion weighted images (DWIs). METHODS: The proposed method evaluates correction performance by measuring variability across datasets of the same object acquired with images having distortions in different directions, thereby overcoming the unavailability of ground‐truth, undistorted DWIs. A comprehensive diffusion MRI dataset, collected using a suitable experimental design, is made available to the scientific community, consisting of three DWI shells (Bmax = 5000 s/mm(2)), 30 gradient directions, a replicate set of antipodal gradient directions, four phase‐encoding directions, and three different head orientations. The proposed methodology was tested using the TORTOISE diffusion MRI processing pipeline. RESULTS: The median variability of the original distorted data was 123% higher for DWIs, 100–168% higher for tensor‐derived metrics and 28–111% higher for MAPMRI metrics, than in the corrected versions. EPI distortions induced substantial variability, nearly comparable to the contribution of eddy‐current distortions. CONCLUSIONS: The dataset and the evaluation strategy proposed herein enable quantitative comparison of different methods for correction of distortions due to motion, eddy‐currents, and other EPI distortions, and can be useful in benchmarking newly developed algorithms. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2018-11-05 2019-04 /pmc/articles/PMC6518940/ /pubmed/30394561 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mrm.27577 Text en © 2018 The Authors Magnetic Resonance in Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Full Papers—Computer Processing and Modeling
Irfanoglu, M. Okan
Sarlls, Joelle
Nayak, Amritha
Pierpaoli, Carlo
Evaluating corrections for Eddy‐currents and other EPI distortions in diffusion MRI: methodology and a dataset for benchmarking
title Evaluating corrections for Eddy‐currents and other EPI distortions in diffusion MRI: methodology and a dataset for benchmarking
title_full Evaluating corrections for Eddy‐currents and other EPI distortions in diffusion MRI: methodology and a dataset for benchmarking
title_fullStr Evaluating corrections for Eddy‐currents and other EPI distortions in diffusion MRI: methodology and a dataset for benchmarking
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating corrections for Eddy‐currents and other EPI distortions in diffusion MRI: methodology and a dataset for benchmarking
title_short Evaluating corrections for Eddy‐currents and other EPI distortions in diffusion MRI: methodology and a dataset for benchmarking
title_sort evaluating corrections for eddy‐currents and other epi distortions in diffusion mri: methodology and a dataset for benchmarking
topic Full Papers—Computer Processing and Modeling
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6518940/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30394561
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mrm.27577
work_keys_str_mv AT irfanoglumokan evaluatingcorrectionsforeddycurrentsandotherepidistortionsindiffusionmrimethodologyandadatasetforbenchmarking
AT sarllsjoelle evaluatingcorrectionsforeddycurrentsandotherepidistortionsindiffusionmrimethodologyandadatasetforbenchmarking
AT nayakamritha evaluatingcorrectionsforeddycurrentsandotherepidistortionsindiffusionmrimethodologyandadatasetforbenchmarking
AT pierpaolicarlo evaluatingcorrectionsforeddycurrentsandotherepidistortionsindiffusionmrimethodologyandadatasetforbenchmarking