影响结构磁共振图像质量的因素分析

IF 3.3 2区 医学 Q1 NEUROIMAGING
Lisa Raoul, Anastasia Benedyk, Oksana Berhe, Thomas Leon Kremer, Malika Renz, Yuchen Lin, Niharika Roychoudhury, Alexander Moldavski, Ali Ghadami, Abhijit Sreepada, Marvin Ganz, Markus Sack, Matthias Ruf, Robert Becker, Andreas Meyer-Lindenberg, Heike Tost, Jamila Andoh
{"title":"影响结构磁共振图像质量的因素分析","authors":"Lisa Raoul,&nbsp;Anastasia Benedyk,&nbsp;Oksana Berhe,&nbsp;Thomas Leon Kremer,&nbsp;Malika Renz,&nbsp;Yuchen Lin,&nbsp;Niharika Roychoudhury,&nbsp;Alexander Moldavski,&nbsp;Ali Ghadami,&nbsp;Abhijit Sreepada,&nbsp;Marvin Ganz,&nbsp;Markus Sack,&nbsp;Matthias Ruf,&nbsp;Robert Becker,&nbsp;Andreas Meyer-Lindenberg,&nbsp;Heike Tost,&nbsp;Jamila Andoh","doi":"10.1002/hbm.70271","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Combining Magnetic Resonance Images (MRI) from different sources is an increasingly common practice that holds high scientific value. Differences in acquisition parameters and participant characteristics can lead to variations in image quality, highlighting the importance of ensuring these variations do not result in biased statistical outcomes. Here, we investigated contributions of both technical and participant-related factors to MRI quality. We examined how technical factors (scanner hardware, software, and acquisition protocols) affect the Image Quality Rating (IQR) of anatomical MRI. We also evaluated the stability of IQR over time, examined the effects of defacing on image quality, and investigated how participant characteristics (age, sex, and mental health) influence IQR. We collected 2779 T1-weighted volumes, acquired at two different scanner sites (both Siemens 3 Tesla), using two coil array designs (64-channel and 32-channel array), and four scanner software versions (VB17, VB15, VE11, XA30), five acquisition protocols, including two different spatial resolutions (1 mm, 0.8 mm isotropic). Data were collected from 910 healthy controls (HC) (499 women, mean age 27.55 ± 11.27) and from 563 individuals (321 women, mean age 36.42 ± 12.93) with various clinical conditions (125 Major Depressive Disorder [MDD], 43 Autism Spectrum Disorder [AUT], 81 Alcohol Use Disorder [AUD], 104 Schizophrenia [SZ], 70 Chronic Pain [CP], 41 Bipolar Disorder [BD], and 100 with unspecified disease [NHC]). Structural images were preprocessed and analyzed using the quality control pipelines of the Computational Anatomy Toolbox (CAT12, https://neuro-jena.github.io/cat12-help/), which provide an image quality rating (IQR) index for each image, with higher IQR indicating a lower image quality. There was no significant effect of scanner site or coil design on IQR. We found a significant effect of scanner software, with lower image quality for VB17 compared with VB15. There was a significant effect of acquisition protocols (i.e., IQR with protocol “T1_1mm_extended” was higher than with others protocols), and image spatial resolution had a significant impact on IQR, with higher IQR values for 1 mm compared to 0.8 mm. Within participants, IQR was stable across sessions, showing minimal day-to-day variability. Defacing had no significant impact on IQR. Regarding participant characteristics, we observed a significant interaction between sex and age: IQR increased with age in men but not in women. Additionally, participants with SZ had a significant higher IQR compared to HC and MDD. This study provides a comprehensive assessment of the influence of technical and participant-related factors on MRI quality. The findings also support IQR as a robust indicator of image quality and emphasize the importance of integrating image quality metrics, both in multicentric studies and within individual research centers. Incorporating IQR as a quality metric would help minimize biases from image quality variations, enabling a more accurate assessment of underlying structural differences and leading to more reliable findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":13019,"journal":{"name":"Human Brain Mapping","volume":"46 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/hbm.70271","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analysis of Factors Affecting Quality in Structural Magnetic Resonance Images\",\"authors\":\"Lisa Raoul,&nbsp;Anastasia Benedyk,&nbsp;Oksana Berhe,&nbsp;Thomas Leon Kremer,&nbsp;Malika Renz,&nbsp;Yuchen Lin,&nbsp;Niharika Roychoudhury,&nbsp;Alexander Moldavski,&nbsp;Ali Ghadami,&nbsp;Abhijit Sreepada,&nbsp;Marvin Ganz,&nbsp;Markus Sack,&nbsp;Matthias Ruf,&nbsp;Robert Becker,&nbsp;Andreas Meyer-Lindenberg,&nbsp;Heike Tost,&nbsp;Jamila Andoh\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/hbm.70271\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Combining Magnetic Resonance Images (MRI) from different sources is an increasingly common practice that holds high scientific value. Differences in acquisition parameters and participant characteristics can lead to variations in image quality, highlighting the importance of ensuring these variations do not result in biased statistical outcomes. Here, we investigated contributions of both technical and participant-related factors to MRI quality. We examined how technical factors (scanner hardware, software, and acquisition protocols) affect the Image Quality Rating (IQR) of anatomical MRI. We also evaluated the stability of IQR over time, examined the effects of defacing on image quality, and investigated how participant characteristics (age, sex, and mental health) influence IQR. We collected 2779 T1-weighted volumes, acquired at two different scanner sites (both Siemens 3 Tesla), using two coil array designs (64-channel and 32-channel array), and four scanner software versions (VB17, VB15, VE11, XA30), five acquisition protocols, including two different spatial resolutions (1 mm, 0.8 mm isotropic). Data were collected from 910 healthy controls (HC) (499 women, mean age 27.55 ± 11.27) and from 563 individuals (321 women, mean age 36.42 ± 12.93) with various clinical conditions (125 Major Depressive Disorder [MDD], 43 Autism Spectrum Disorder [AUT], 81 Alcohol Use Disorder [AUD], 104 Schizophrenia [SZ], 70 Chronic Pain [CP], 41 Bipolar Disorder [BD], and 100 with unspecified disease [NHC]). Structural images were preprocessed and analyzed using the quality control pipelines of the Computational Anatomy Toolbox (CAT12, https://neuro-jena.github.io/cat12-help/), which provide an image quality rating (IQR) index for each image, with higher IQR indicating a lower image quality. There was no significant effect of scanner site or coil design on IQR. We found a significant effect of scanner software, with lower image quality for VB17 compared with VB15. There was a significant effect of acquisition protocols (i.e., IQR with protocol “T1_1mm_extended” was higher than with others protocols), and image spatial resolution had a significant impact on IQR, with higher IQR values for 1 mm compared to 0.8 mm. Within participants, IQR was stable across sessions, showing minimal day-to-day variability. Defacing had no significant impact on IQR. Regarding participant characteristics, we observed a significant interaction between sex and age: IQR increased with age in men but not in women. Additionally, participants with SZ had a significant higher IQR compared to HC and MDD. This study provides a comprehensive assessment of the influence of technical and participant-related factors on MRI quality. The findings also support IQR as a robust indicator of image quality and emphasize the importance of integrating image quality metrics, both in multicentric studies and within individual research centers. Incorporating IQR as a quality metric would help minimize biases from image quality variations, enabling a more accurate assessment of underlying structural differences and leading to more reliable findings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13019,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human Brain Mapping\",\"volume\":\"46 11\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/hbm.70271\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human Brain Mapping\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hbm.70271\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROIMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Brain Mapping","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hbm.70271","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NEUROIMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

结合不同来源的磁共振图像(MRI)是一种越来越普遍的做法,具有很高的科学价值。采集参数和参与者特征的差异可能导致图像质量的变化,强调确保这些变化不会导致有偏差的统计结果的重要性。在这里,我们调查了技术因素和参与者相关因素对MRI质量的影响。我们研究了技术因素(扫描仪硬件,软件和采集协议)如何影响解剖MRI的图像质量评级(IQR)。我们还评估了IQR随时间的稳定性,检查了污损对图像质量的影响,并调查了参与者的特征(年龄、性别和心理健康)如何影响IQR。我们收集了2779个t1加权体积,采集于两个不同的扫描仪站点(均为Siemens 3 Tesla),使用两种线圈阵列设计(64通道和32通道阵列),四种扫描仪软件版本(VB17, VB15, VE11, XA30),五种采集协议,包括两种不同的空间分辨率(1 mm, 0.8 mm各向同性)。数据来自910名健康对照(499名女性,平均年龄27.55±11.27岁)和563名患有各种临床症状的个体(321名女性,平均年龄36.42±12.93岁),其中重度抑郁症(MDD) 125名,自闭症谱系障碍(AUT) 43名,酒精使用障碍(AUD) 81名,精神分裂症(SZ) 104名,慢性疼痛(CP) 70名,双相情感障碍(BD) 41名,疾病不详(NHC) 100名。使用计算解剖工具箱(CAT12, https://neuro-jena.github.io/cat12-help/)的质量控制管道对结构图像进行预处理和分析,该管道为每张图像提供图像质量评级(IQR)指数,IQR越高表示图像质量越低。扫描位置和线圈设计对IQR无显著影响。我们发现扫描软件的显著影响,VB17的图像质量低于VB15。采集协议对IQR有显著影响(即“T1_1mm_extended”协议的IQR高于其他协议),图像空间分辨率对IQR有显著影响,1mm的IQR值高于0.8 mm。在参与者中,IQR在整个疗程中是稳定的,显示出最小的日常变化。污损对IQR无显著影响。关于参与者的特征,我们观察到性别和年龄之间的显著相互作用:男性的IQR随着年龄的增长而增加,而女性则没有。此外,与HC和MDD相比,SZ参与者的IQR显著更高。本研究全面评估了技术因素和参与者相关因素对MRI质量的影响。研究结果还支持IQR作为图像质量的可靠指标,并强调了在多中心研究和单个研究中心内整合图像质量指标的重要性。将IQR作为质量度量将有助于减少图像质量变化带来的偏差,从而更准确地评估潜在的结构差异,并获得更可靠的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Analysis of Factors Affecting Quality in Structural Magnetic Resonance Images

Analysis of Factors Affecting Quality in Structural Magnetic Resonance Images

Combining Magnetic Resonance Images (MRI) from different sources is an increasingly common practice that holds high scientific value. Differences in acquisition parameters and participant characteristics can lead to variations in image quality, highlighting the importance of ensuring these variations do not result in biased statistical outcomes. Here, we investigated contributions of both technical and participant-related factors to MRI quality. We examined how technical factors (scanner hardware, software, and acquisition protocols) affect the Image Quality Rating (IQR) of anatomical MRI. We also evaluated the stability of IQR over time, examined the effects of defacing on image quality, and investigated how participant characteristics (age, sex, and mental health) influence IQR. We collected 2779 T1-weighted volumes, acquired at two different scanner sites (both Siemens 3 Tesla), using two coil array designs (64-channel and 32-channel array), and four scanner software versions (VB17, VB15, VE11, XA30), five acquisition protocols, including two different spatial resolutions (1 mm, 0.8 mm isotropic). Data were collected from 910 healthy controls (HC) (499 women, mean age 27.55 ± 11.27) and from 563 individuals (321 women, mean age 36.42 ± 12.93) with various clinical conditions (125 Major Depressive Disorder [MDD], 43 Autism Spectrum Disorder [AUT], 81 Alcohol Use Disorder [AUD], 104 Schizophrenia [SZ], 70 Chronic Pain [CP], 41 Bipolar Disorder [BD], and 100 with unspecified disease [NHC]). Structural images were preprocessed and analyzed using the quality control pipelines of the Computational Anatomy Toolbox (CAT12, https://neuro-jena.github.io/cat12-help/), which provide an image quality rating (IQR) index for each image, with higher IQR indicating a lower image quality. There was no significant effect of scanner site or coil design on IQR. We found a significant effect of scanner software, with lower image quality for VB17 compared with VB15. There was a significant effect of acquisition protocols (i.e., IQR with protocol “T1_1mm_extended” was higher than with others protocols), and image spatial resolution had a significant impact on IQR, with higher IQR values for 1 mm compared to 0.8 mm. Within participants, IQR was stable across sessions, showing minimal day-to-day variability. Defacing had no significant impact on IQR. Regarding participant characteristics, we observed a significant interaction between sex and age: IQR increased with age in men but not in women. Additionally, participants with SZ had a significant higher IQR compared to HC and MDD. This study provides a comprehensive assessment of the influence of technical and participant-related factors on MRI quality. The findings also support IQR as a robust indicator of image quality and emphasize the importance of integrating image quality metrics, both in multicentric studies and within individual research centers. Incorporating IQR as a quality metric would help minimize biases from image quality variations, enabling a more accurate assessment of underlying structural differences and leading to more reliable findings.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Human Brain Mapping
Human Brain Mapping 医学-核医学
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
401
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Human Brain Mapping publishes peer-reviewed basic, clinical, technical, and theoretical research in the interdisciplinary and rapidly expanding field of human brain mapping. The journal features research derived from non-invasive brain imaging modalities used to explore the spatial and temporal organization of the neural systems supporting human behavior. Imaging modalities of interest include positron emission tomography, event-related potentials, electro-and magnetoencephalography, magnetic resonance imaging, and single-photon emission tomography. Brain mapping research in both normal and clinical populations is encouraged. Article formats include Research Articles, Review Articles, Clinical Case Studies, and Technique, as well as Technological Developments, Theoretical Articles, and Synthetic Reviews. Technical advances, such as novel brain imaging methods, analyses for detecting or localizing neural activity, synergistic uses of multiple imaging modalities, and strategies for the design of behavioral paradigms and neural-systems modeling are of particular interest. The journal endorses the propagation of methodological standards and encourages database development in the field of human brain mapping.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信