Cargando…

Comparison of test–retest reliability of BOLD and pCASL fMRI in a two-center study

BACKGROUND: The establishment of test–retest reliability and reproducibility (TRR) is an important part of validating any research tool, including functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). The primary objective of this study is to investigate the reliability of pseudo-Continuous Arterial Spin La...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ibinson, James W., Gillman, Andrea G., Schmidthorst, Vince, Li, Conrad, Napadow, Vitaly, Loggia, Marco L., Wasan, Ajay D.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8977011/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35366813
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12880-022-00791-9
_version_ 1784680684419284992
author Ibinson, James W.
Gillman, Andrea G.
Schmidthorst, Vince
Li, Conrad
Napadow, Vitaly
Loggia, Marco L.
Wasan, Ajay D.
author_facet Ibinson, James W.
Gillman, Andrea G.
Schmidthorst, Vince
Li, Conrad
Napadow, Vitaly
Loggia, Marco L.
Wasan, Ajay D.
author_sort Ibinson, James W.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The establishment of test–retest reliability and reproducibility (TRR) is an important part of validating any research tool, including functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). The primary objective of this study is to investigate the reliability of pseudo-Continuous Arterial Spin Labeling (pCASL) and Blood Oxygen Level Dependent (BOLD) fMRI data acquired across two different scanners in a sample of healthy adults. While single site/single scanner studies have shown acceptable repeatability, TRR of both in a practical multisite study occurring in two facilities spread out across the country with weeks to months between scans is critically needed. METHODS: Ten subjects were imaged with similar 3 T MRI scanners at the University of Pittsburgh and Massachusetts General Hospital. Finger-tapping and Resting-state data were acquired for both techniques. Analysis of the resting state data for functional connectivity was performed with the Functional Connectivity Toolbox, while analysis of the finger tapping data was accomplished with FSL. pCASL Blood flow data was generated using AST Toolbox. Activated areas and networks were identified via pre-defined atlases and dual-regression techniques. Analysis for TRR was conducted by comparing pCASL and BOLD images in terms of Intraclass correlation coefficients, Dice Similarity Coefficients, and repeated measures ANOVA. RESULTS: Both BOLD and pCASL scans showed strong activation and correlation between the two locations for the finger tapping tasks. Functional connectivity analyses identified elements of the default mode network in all resting scans at both locations. Multivariate repeated measures ANOVA showed significant variability between subjects, but no significant variability for location. Global CBF was very similar between the two scanning locations, and repeated measures ANOVA showed no significant differences between the two scanning locations. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study show that when similar scanner hardware and software is coupled with identical data analysis protocols, consistent and reproducible functional brain images can be acquired across sites. The variability seen in the activation maps is greater for pCASL versus BOLD images, as expected, however groups maps are remarkably similar despite the low number of subjects. This demonstrates that multi-site fMRI studies of task-based and resting state brain activity is feasible.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8977011
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89770112022-04-04 Comparison of test–retest reliability of BOLD and pCASL fMRI in a two-center study Ibinson, James W. Gillman, Andrea G. Schmidthorst, Vince Li, Conrad Napadow, Vitaly Loggia, Marco L. Wasan, Ajay D. BMC Med Imaging Research BACKGROUND: The establishment of test–retest reliability and reproducibility (TRR) is an important part of validating any research tool, including functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). The primary objective of this study is to investigate the reliability of pseudo-Continuous Arterial Spin Labeling (pCASL) and Blood Oxygen Level Dependent (BOLD) fMRI data acquired across two different scanners in a sample of healthy adults. While single site/single scanner studies have shown acceptable repeatability, TRR of both in a practical multisite study occurring in two facilities spread out across the country with weeks to months between scans is critically needed. METHODS: Ten subjects were imaged with similar 3 T MRI scanners at the University of Pittsburgh and Massachusetts General Hospital. Finger-tapping and Resting-state data were acquired for both techniques. Analysis of the resting state data for functional connectivity was performed with the Functional Connectivity Toolbox, while analysis of the finger tapping data was accomplished with FSL. pCASL Blood flow data was generated using AST Toolbox. Activated areas and networks were identified via pre-defined atlases and dual-regression techniques. Analysis for TRR was conducted by comparing pCASL and BOLD images in terms of Intraclass correlation coefficients, Dice Similarity Coefficients, and repeated measures ANOVA. RESULTS: Both BOLD and pCASL scans showed strong activation and correlation between the two locations for the finger tapping tasks. Functional connectivity analyses identified elements of the default mode network in all resting scans at both locations. Multivariate repeated measures ANOVA showed significant variability between subjects, but no significant variability for location. Global CBF was very similar between the two scanning locations, and repeated measures ANOVA showed no significant differences between the two scanning locations. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study show that when similar scanner hardware and software is coupled with identical data analysis protocols, consistent and reproducible functional brain images can be acquired across sites. The variability seen in the activation maps is greater for pCASL versus BOLD images, as expected, however groups maps are remarkably similar despite the low number of subjects. This demonstrates that multi-site fMRI studies of task-based and resting state brain activity is feasible. BioMed Central 2022-04-03 /pmc/articles/PMC8977011/ /pubmed/35366813 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12880-022-00791-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Ibinson, James W.
Gillman, Andrea G.
Schmidthorst, Vince
Li, Conrad
Napadow, Vitaly
Loggia, Marco L.
Wasan, Ajay D.
Comparison of test–retest reliability of BOLD and pCASL fMRI in a two-center study
title Comparison of test–retest reliability of BOLD and pCASL fMRI in a two-center study
title_full Comparison of test–retest reliability of BOLD and pCASL fMRI in a two-center study
title_fullStr Comparison of test–retest reliability of BOLD and pCASL fMRI in a two-center study
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of test–retest reliability of BOLD and pCASL fMRI in a two-center study
title_short Comparison of test–retest reliability of BOLD and pCASL fMRI in a two-center study
title_sort comparison of test–retest reliability of bold and pcasl fmri in a two-center study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8977011/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35366813
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12880-022-00791-9
work_keys_str_mv AT ibinsonjamesw comparisonoftestretestreliabilityofboldandpcaslfmriinatwocenterstudy
AT gillmanandreag comparisonoftestretestreliabilityofboldandpcaslfmriinatwocenterstudy
AT schmidthorstvince comparisonoftestretestreliabilityofboldandpcaslfmriinatwocenterstudy
AT liconrad comparisonoftestretestreliabilityofboldandpcaslfmriinatwocenterstudy
AT napadowvitaly comparisonoftestretestreliabilityofboldandpcaslfmriinatwocenterstudy
AT loggiamarcol comparisonoftestretestreliabilityofboldandpcaslfmriinatwocenterstudy
AT wasanajayd comparisonoftestretestreliabilityofboldandpcaslfmriinatwocenterstudy