Cargando…

Is it time to switch your T1W sequence? Assessing the impact of prospective motion correction on the reliability and quality of structural imaging

New large neuroimaging studies, such as the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development study (ABCD) and Human Connectome Project (HCP) Development studies are adopting a new T1-weighted imaging sequence with prospective motion correction (PMC) in favor of the more traditional 3-Dimensional Magnetization...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ai, Lei, Craddock, R. Cameron, Tottenham, Nim, Dyke, Jonathan P, Lim, Ryan, Colcombe, Stanley, Milham, Michael, Franco, Alexandre R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7898192/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33248256
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.117585
_version_ 1783653814686973952
author Ai, Lei
Craddock, R. Cameron
Tottenham, Nim
Dyke, Jonathan P
Lim, Ryan
Colcombe, Stanley
Milham, Michael
Franco, Alexandre R.
author_facet Ai, Lei
Craddock, R. Cameron
Tottenham, Nim
Dyke, Jonathan P
Lim, Ryan
Colcombe, Stanley
Milham, Michael
Franco, Alexandre R.
author_sort Ai, Lei
collection PubMed
description New large neuroimaging studies, such as the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development study (ABCD) and Human Connectome Project (HCP) Development studies are adopting a new T1-weighted imaging sequence with prospective motion correction (PMC) in favor of the more traditional 3-Dimensional Magnetization-Prepared Rapid Gradient-Echo Imaging (MPRAGE) sequence. Here, we used a developmental dataset (ages 5–21, N = 348) from the Healthy Brain Network (HBN) Initiative to directly compare two widely used MRI structural sequences: one based on the Human Connectome Project (MPRAGE) and another based on the ABCD study (MPRAGE+PMC). We aimed to determine if the morphometric measurements obtained from both protocols are equivalent or if one sequence has a clear advantage over the other. The sequences were also compared through quality control measurements. Inter- and intra-sequence reliability were assessed with another set of participants (N = 71) from HBN that performed two MPRAGE and two MPRAGE+PMC sequences within the same imaging session, with one MPRAGE (MPRAGE1) and MPRAGE+PMC (MPRAGE+PMC1) pair at the beginning of the session and another pair (MPRAGE2 and MPRAGE+PMC2) at the end of the session. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) scores for morphometric measurements such as volume and cortical thickness showed that intra-sequence reliability is the highest with the two MPRAGE+PMC sequences and lowest with the two MPRAGE sequences. Regarding inter-sequence reliability, ICC scores were higher for the MPRAGE1 - MPRAGE+PMC1 pair at the beginning of the session than the MPRAGE1 - MPRAGE2 pair, possibly due to the higher motion artifacts in the MPRAGE2 run. Results also indicated that the MPRAGE+PMC sequence is robust, but not impervious, to high head motion. For quality control metrics, the traditional MPRAGE yielded better results than MPRAGE+PMC in 5 of the 8 measurements. In conclusion, morphometric measurements evaluated here showed high inter-sequence reliability between the MPRAGE and MPRAGE+PMC sequences, especially in images with low head motion. We suggest that studies targeting hyperkinetic populations use the MPRAGE+PMC sequence, given its robustness to head motion and higher reliability scores. However, neuroimaging researchers studying non-hyperkinetic participants can choose either MPRAGE or MPRAGE+PMC sequences, but should carefully consider the apparent tradeoff between relatively increased reliability, but reduced quality control metrics when using the MPRAGE+PMC sequence.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7898192
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78981922021-02-22 Is it time to switch your T1W sequence? Assessing the impact of prospective motion correction on the reliability and quality of structural imaging Ai, Lei Craddock, R. Cameron Tottenham, Nim Dyke, Jonathan P Lim, Ryan Colcombe, Stanley Milham, Michael Franco, Alexandre R. Neuroimage Article New large neuroimaging studies, such as the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development study (ABCD) and Human Connectome Project (HCP) Development studies are adopting a new T1-weighted imaging sequence with prospective motion correction (PMC) in favor of the more traditional 3-Dimensional Magnetization-Prepared Rapid Gradient-Echo Imaging (MPRAGE) sequence. Here, we used a developmental dataset (ages 5–21, N = 348) from the Healthy Brain Network (HBN) Initiative to directly compare two widely used MRI structural sequences: one based on the Human Connectome Project (MPRAGE) and another based on the ABCD study (MPRAGE+PMC). We aimed to determine if the morphometric measurements obtained from both protocols are equivalent or if one sequence has a clear advantage over the other. The sequences were also compared through quality control measurements. Inter- and intra-sequence reliability were assessed with another set of participants (N = 71) from HBN that performed two MPRAGE and two MPRAGE+PMC sequences within the same imaging session, with one MPRAGE (MPRAGE1) and MPRAGE+PMC (MPRAGE+PMC1) pair at the beginning of the session and another pair (MPRAGE2 and MPRAGE+PMC2) at the end of the session. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) scores for morphometric measurements such as volume and cortical thickness showed that intra-sequence reliability is the highest with the two MPRAGE+PMC sequences and lowest with the two MPRAGE sequences. Regarding inter-sequence reliability, ICC scores were higher for the MPRAGE1 - MPRAGE+PMC1 pair at the beginning of the session than the MPRAGE1 - MPRAGE2 pair, possibly due to the higher motion artifacts in the MPRAGE2 run. Results also indicated that the MPRAGE+PMC sequence is robust, but not impervious, to high head motion. For quality control metrics, the traditional MPRAGE yielded better results than MPRAGE+PMC in 5 of the 8 measurements. In conclusion, morphometric measurements evaluated here showed high inter-sequence reliability between the MPRAGE and MPRAGE+PMC sequences, especially in images with low head motion. We suggest that studies targeting hyperkinetic populations use the MPRAGE+PMC sequence, given its robustness to head motion and higher reliability scores. However, neuroimaging researchers studying non-hyperkinetic participants can choose either MPRAGE or MPRAGE+PMC sequences, but should carefully consider the apparent tradeoff between relatively increased reliability, but reduced quality control metrics when using the MPRAGE+PMC sequence. 2020-11-26 2021-02-01 /pmc/articles/PMC7898192/ /pubmed/33248256 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.117585 Text en This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
spellingShingle Article
Ai, Lei
Craddock, R. Cameron
Tottenham, Nim
Dyke, Jonathan P
Lim, Ryan
Colcombe, Stanley
Milham, Michael
Franco, Alexandre R.
Is it time to switch your T1W sequence? Assessing the impact of prospective motion correction on the reliability and quality of structural imaging
title Is it time to switch your T1W sequence? Assessing the impact of prospective motion correction on the reliability and quality of structural imaging
title_full Is it time to switch your T1W sequence? Assessing the impact of prospective motion correction on the reliability and quality of structural imaging
title_fullStr Is it time to switch your T1W sequence? Assessing the impact of prospective motion correction on the reliability and quality of structural imaging
title_full_unstemmed Is it time to switch your T1W sequence? Assessing the impact of prospective motion correction on the reliability and quality of structural imaging
title_short Is it time to switch your T1W sequence? Assessing the impact of prospective motion correction on the reliability and quality of structural imaging
title_sort is it time to switch your t1w sequence? assessing the impact of prospective motion correction on the reliability and quality of structural imaging
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7898192/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33248256
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.117585
work_keys_str_mv AT ailei isittimetoswitchyourt1wsequenceassessingtheimpactofprospectivemotioncorrectiononthereliabilityandqualityofstructuralimaging
AT craddockrcameron isittimetoswitchyourt1wsequenceassessingtheimpactofprospectivemotioncorrectiononthereliabilityandqualityofstructuralimaging
AT tottenhamnim isittimetoswitchyourt1wsequenceassessingtheimpactofprospectivemotioncorrectiononthereliabilityandqualityofstructuralimaging
AT dykejonathanp isittimetoswitchyourt1wsequenceassessingtheimpactofprospectivemotioncorrectiononthereliabilityandqualityofstructuralimaging
AT limryan isittimetoswitchyourt1wsequenceassessingtheimpactofprospectivemotioncorrectiononthereliabilityandqualityofstructuralimaging
AT colcombestanley isittimetoswitchyourt1wsequenceassessingtheimpactofprospectivemotioncorrectiononthereliabilityandqualityofstructuralimaging
AT milhammichael isittimetoswitchyourt1wsequenceassessingtheimpactofprospectivemotioncorrectiononthereliabilityandqualityofstructuralimaging
AT francoalexandrer isittimetoswitchyourt1wsequenceassessingtheimpactofprospectivemotioncorrectiononthereliabilityandqualityofstructuralimaging