Brain morphometry with multiecho MPRAGE

被引:458
作者
van der Kouwe, Andre J. W. [1 ]
Benner, Thomas [1 ]
Salat, David H. [1 ]
Fischl, Bruce [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Harvard Univ, Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Sch Med, Athinoula A Martinos Ctr Biomed Imaging,Dept Radi, Charlestown, MA 02129 USA
[2] MIT, AI Lab, Cambridge, MA 02139 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.12.025
中图分类号
Q189 [神经科学];
学科分类号
071006 ;
摘要
In brain morphometry studies using magnetic resonance imaging, several scans with a range of contrasts are often collected. The images may be locally distorted due to imperfect shimming in regions where magnetic susceptibility changes rapidly, and all scans may not be distorted in the same way. In multispectral studies it is critical that the edges of structures align precisely across all contrasts. The MPRAGE (NIPR) sequence has excellent contrast properties for cortical segmentation, while multiecho FLASH (MEF) provides better contrast for segmentation of subcortical structures. Here, a multiecho version of the MPRAGE (MEMPR) is evaluated using SIENA and FreeSurfer. The higher bandwidth of the MEMPR results in reduced distortions that match those of the MEF while the SNR is recovered by combining the echoes. Accurate automatic identification of cortex and thickness estimation is frustrated by the presence of dura adjacent to regions such as the entorhinal cortex. In the typical MPRAGE protocol, dura and cortex are approximately isointense. However, dura has substantially smaller T2* than cortex. This information is represented in the multiple echoes ofthe MEMPR. An algorithm is described for correcting cortical thickness using T2*. It is shown that with MEMPR, SIENA generates more reliable percentage brain volume changes and FreeSurfer generates more reliable cortical models. The regions where cortical thickness is affected by dura are shown. MEMPR did not substantially improve subcortical segmentations. Since acquisition time is the same for MEMPR as for MPRAGE, and it has better distortion properties and additional T2* information, MEMPR is recommended for morphometry studies. (C) 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:559 / 569
页数:11
相关论文
共 30 条
  • [1] Comparison of manual and automatic section positioning of brain MR images
    Benner, T
    Wisco, JJ
    van der Kouwe, AJW
    Fischl, B
    Vangel, MG
    Hochberg, FH
    Sorensen, AG
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2006, 239 (01) : 246 - 254
  • [2] Cortical surface-based analysis - I. Segmentation and surface reconstruction
    Dale, AM
    Fischl, B
    Sereno, MI
    [J]. NEUROIMAGE, 1999, 9 (02) : 179 - 194
  • [3] Optimisation of the 3D MDEFT sequence for anatomical brain imaging: Technical implications at 1.5 and 3 T
    Deichmann, R
    Schwarzbauer, C
    Turner, R
    [J]. NEUROIMAGE, 2004, 21 (02) : 757 - 767
  • [4] High-resolution T1 and T2 mapping of the brain in a clinically acceptable time with DESPOT1 and DESPOT2
    Deoni, SCL
    Peters, TM
    Rutt, BK
    [J]. MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICINE, 2005, 53 (01) : 237 - 241
  • [5] Rapid combined T1 and T2 mapping using gradient recalled acquisition in the steady state
    Deoni, SCL
    Rutt, BK
    Peters, TM
    [J]. MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICINE, 2003, 49 (03) : 515 - 526
  • [6] Duda R. O., 1973, Pattern Classification
  • [7] Fischl B, 1999, HUM BRAIN MAPP, V8, P272, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0193(1999)8:4<272::AID-HBM10>3.0.CO
  • [8] 2-4
  • [9] Sequence-independent segmentation of magnetic resonance images
    Fischl, B
    Salat, DH
    van der Kouwe, AJW
    Makris, N
    Ségonne, F
    Quinn, BT
    Dale, AM
    [J]. NEUROIMAGE, 2004, 23 : S69 - S84
  • [10] Whole brain segmentation: Automated labeling of neuroanatomical structures in the human brain
    Fischl, B
    Salat, DH
    Busa, E
    Albert, M
    Dieterich, M
    Haselgrove, C
    van der Kouwe, A
    Killiany, R
    Kennedy, D
    Klaveness, S
    Montillo, A
    Makris, N
    Rosen, B
    Dale, AM
    [J]. NEURON, 2002, 33 (03) : 341 - 355