Assessing measurement consistency of a diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) quality control (QC) anisotropy phantom.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Nicholas Simard, Alec D Fernback, Norman B Konyer, Fergal Kerins, Michael D Noseworthy
{"title":"Assessing measurement consistency of a diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) quality control (QC) anisotropy phantom.","authors":"Nicholas Simard, Alec D Fernback, Norman B Konyer, Fergal Kerins, Michael D Noseworthy","doi":"10.1007/s10334-025-01244-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We evaluated a quality control (QC) phantom designed to mimic diffusion characteristics and white matter fiber tracts in the brain. We hypothesized that acquisition of diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) data on different vendors and over multiple repeated measures would not contribute to significant variability in calculated diffusion tensor scalar metrics such as fractional anisotropy (FA) and mean diffusivity (MD).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The DTI QC phantom was scanned using a 32-direction DTI sequence on General Electric (GE), Siemens, and Philips 3 Tesla scanners. Motion probing gradients (MPGs) were investigated as a source of variance in our statistical design, and data were acquired on GE and Siemens scanners using GE, Siemens, and Philips vendor MPGs for 32 directions. In total, 8 repeated scans were made for each GE/Siemens combination of vendor and MPGs with 8 repeated scans on a Philips machine using its stock DTI sequence. Data were analyzed using 2-way ANOVAs to investigate repeat scan and vendor variances and 3-way ANOVAs with repeat, MPG, and vendor as factors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No statistical differences (i.e., P > 0.05) were found in any DTI scalar metrics (FA, MD) or for any factor, suggesting system constancy across imaging platforms and the specified phantom's reliability and reproducibility across vendors and conditions.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>A DTI QC phantom demonstrates that DTI measurements maintain their consistency across different MRI systems and can contribute to a standard that is more reliable for quantitative MRI analyses.</p>","PeriodicalId":18067,"journal":{"name":"Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10334-025-01244-4","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: We evaluated a quality control (QC) phantom designed to mimic diffusion characteristics and white matter fiber tracts in the brain. We hypothesized that acquisition of diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) data on different vendors and over multiple repeated measures would not contribute to significant variability in calculated diffusion tensor scalar metrics such as fractional anisotropy (FA) and mean diffusivity (MD).

Materials and methods: The DTI QC phantom was scanned using a 32-direction DTI sequence on General Electric (GE), Siemens, and Philips 3 Tesla scanners. Motion probing gradients (MPGs) were investigated as a source of variance in our statistical design, and data were acquired on GE and Siemens scanners using GE, Siemens, and Philips vendor MPGs for 32 directions. In total, 8 repeated scans were made for each GE/Siemens combination of vendor and MPGs with 8 repeated scans on a Philips machine using its stock DTI sequence. Data were analyzed using 2-way ANOVAs to investigate repeat scan and vendor variances and 3-way ANOVAs with repeat, MPG, and vendor as factors.

Results: No statistical differences (i.e., P > 0.05) were found in any DTI scalar metrics (FA, MD) or for any factor, suggesting system constancy across imaging platforms and the specified phantom's reliability and reproducibility across vendors and conditions.

Discussion: A DTI QC phantom demonstrates that DTI measurements maintain their consistency across different MRI systems and can contribute to a standard that is more reliable for quantitative MRI analyses.

扩散张量成像(DTI)质量控制(QC)各向异性模体测量一致性评估。
目的:我们评估了一种质量控制(QC)模型,该模型旨在模拟大脑中的扩散特性和白质纤维束。我们假设,不同供应商和多次重复测量的扩散张量成像(DTI)数据的获取不会导致计算的扩散张量标量指标(如分数各向异性(FA)和平均扩散率(MD))的显著变化。材料和方法:采用32向DTI序列在通用电气(GE)、西门子和飞利浦3特斯拉扫描仪上扫描DTI QC模体。在我们的统计设计中,运动探测梯度(mpg)作为方差的来源进行了研究,数据是在GE和Siemens扫描仪上使用GE、Siemens和Philips供应商的mpg在32个方向上获取的。总的来说,每个GE/Siemens供应商和mpg组合进行了8次重复扫描,并在飞利浦机器上使用其库存DTI序列进行了8次重复扫描。数据分析采用双因素方差分析(two -way anova)来调查重复扫描和供应商差异,并采用三因素方差分析(3-way anova)来调查重复扫描、MPG和供应商差异。结果:在任何DTI标量指标(FA, MD)或任何因素中均未发现统计学差异(即P > 0.05),表明系统在成像平台上的一致性以及指定的幻影在供应商和条件下的可靠性和可重复性。讨论:DTI QC幻影表明,DTI测量值在不同的MRI系统中保持一致性,可以为定量MRI分析提供更可靠的标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
58
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: MAGMA is a multidisciplinary international journal devoted to the publication of articles on all aspects of magnetic resonance techniques and their applications in medicine and biology. MAGMA currently publishes research papers, reviews, letters to the editor, and commentaries, six times a year. The subject areas covered by MAGMA include: advances in materials, hardware and software in magnetic resonance technology, new developments and results in research and practical applications of magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy related to biology and medicine, study of animal models and intact cells using magnetic resonance, reports of clinical trials on humans and clinical validation of magnetic resonance protocols.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信