多通道相位重建方法在人死后大脑定量易感性图谱中的应用

IF 2.624
Fábio Seiji Otsuka , Maria Concepcion Garcia Otaduy , José Henrique Monteiro Azevedo , Khallil Taverna Chaim , Carlos Ernesto Garrido Salmon
{"title":"多通道相位重建方法在人死后大脑定量易感性图谱中的应用","authors":"Fábio Seiji Otsuka ,&nbsp;Maria Concepcion Garcia Otaduy ,&nbsp;José Henrique Monteiro Azevedo ,&nbsp;Khallil Taverna Chaim ,&nbsp;Carlos Ernesto Garrido Salmon","doi":"10.1016/j.jmro.2023.100097","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping (QSM) is an established Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) technique with high potential in brain iron studies associated to several neurodegenerative diseases. Unlike other MRI techniques, QSM relies on phase images to estimate tissue's relative susceptibility, therefore requiring a reliable phase data. Phase images from a multi-channel acquisition should be reconstructed in a proper way. On this work it was compared the performance of combination of phase matching algorithms (MCPC3D-S and VRC) and phase combination methods based on a complex weighted sum of phases, considering the magnitude at different powers (<em>k</em> = 0 to 4) as the weighting factor. These reconstruction methods were applied in two datasets: a simulated brain dataset for a 4-coil array and data of 22 postmortem subjects acquired at a 7T scanner using a 32 channels coil. For the simulated dataset, differences between the ground truth and the Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) were evaluated. For both simulated and postmortem data, the mean (MS) and standard deviation (SD) of susceptibility values of five deep gray matter regions were calculated. For the postmortem subjects, MS and SD were statistically compared across all subjects. A qualitative analysis indicated no differences between methods, except for the Adaptive approach on postmortem data, which showed intense artifacts. In the 20% noise level case, the simulated data showed increased noise in central regions. Quantitative analysis showed that both MS and SD were not statistically different when comparing <span><math><mrow><mi>k</mi><mo>=</mo><mn>1</mn></mrow></math></span> and <span><math><mrow><mi>k</mi><mo>=</mo><mn>2</mn></mrow></math></span> on postmortem brain images, however visual inspection showed some boundaries artifacts on <span><math><mrow><mi>k</mi><mo>=</mo><mn>2</mn></mrow></math></span>. Furthermore, the RMSE decreased (on regions near the coils) and increased (on central regions and on overall QSM) with increasing <span><math><mi>k</mi></math></span>. In conclusion, for reconstruction of phase images from multiple coils with no reference available, alternative methods are needed. In this study it was found that overall, the phase combination with <span><math><mrow><mi>k</mi><mo>=</mo><mn>1</mn></mrow></math></span> is preferred over other powers of <span><math><mi>k</mi></math></span>.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":365,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Magnetic Resonance Open","volume":"14 ","pages":"Article 100097"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6240,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10062192/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of multi-channel phase reconstruction methods for quantitative susceptibility mapping on postmortem human brain\",\"authors\":\"Fábio Seiji Otsuka ,&nbsp;Maria Concepcion Garcia Otaduy ,&nbsp;José Henrique Monteiro Azevedo ,&nbsp;Khallil Taverna Chaim ,&nbsp;Carlos Ernesto Garrido Salmon\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jmro.2023.100097\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping (QSM) is an established Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) technique with high potential in brain iron studies associated to several neurodegenerative diseases. Unlike other MRI techniques, QSM relies on phase images to estimate tissue's relative susceptibility, therefore requiring a reliable phase data. Phase images from a multi-channel acquisition should be reconstructed in a proper way. On this work it was compared the performance of combination of phase matching algorithms (MCPC3D-S and VRC) and phase combination methods based on a complex weighted sum of phases, considering the magnitude at different powers (<em>k</em> = 0 to 4) as the weighting factor. These reconstruction methods were applied in two datasets: a simulated brain dataset for a 4-coil array and data of 22 postmortem subjects acquired at a 7T scanner using a 32 channels coil. For the simulated dataset, differences between the ground truth and the Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) were evaluated. For both simulated and postmortem data, the mean (MS) and standard deviation (SD) of susceptibility values of five deep gray matter regions were calculated. For the postmortem subjects, MS and SD were statistically compared across all subjects. A qualitative analysis indicated no differences between methods, except for the Adaptive approach on postmortem data, which showed intense artifacts. In the 20% noise level case, the simulated data showed increased noise in central regions. Quantitative analysis showed that both MS and SD were not statistically different when comparing <span><math><mrow><mi>k</mi><mo>=</mo><mn>1</mn></mrow></math></span> and <span><math><mrow><mi>k</mi><mo>=</mo><mn>2</mn></mrow></math></span> on postmortem brain images, however visual inspection showed some boundaries artifacts on <span><math><mrow><mi>k</mi><mo>=</mo><mn>2</mn></mrow></math></span>. Furthermore, the RMSE decreased (on regions near the coils) and increased (on central regions and on overall QSM) with increasing <span><math><mi>k</mi></math></span>. In conclusion, for reconstruction of phase images from multiple coils with no reference available, alternative methods are needed. In this study it was found that overall, the phase combination with <span><math><mrow><mi>k</mi><mo>=</mo><mn>1</mn></mrow></math></span> is preferred over other powers of <span><math><mi>k</mi></math></span>.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":365,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Magnetic Resonance Open\",\"volume\":\"14 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100097\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6240,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10062192/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Magnetic Resonance Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666441023000055\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Magnetic Resonance Open","FirstCategoryId":"1","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666441023000055","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

定量敏感性制图(QSM)是一种成熟的磁共振成像(MRI)技术,在脑铁研究中具有很高的潜力,与一些神经退行性疾病有关。与其他MRI技术不同,QSM依赖于相位图像来估计组织的相对易感性,因此需要可靠的相位数据。多通道采集的相位图像需要以适当的方式进行重构。在此基础上,比较了相位匹配组合算法(MCPC3D-S和VRC)与基于相位复加权和的相位组合算法的性能,考虑了不同幂次(k = 0 ~ 4)的幅值作为权重因子。这些重建方法应用于两个数据集:一个是4线圈阵列的模拟大脑数据集,另一个是使用32通道线圈的7T扫描仪获得的22名死后受试者的数据。对于模拟数据集,评估了真实值与均方根误差(RMSE)之间的差异。对于模拟和死后的数据,计算5个深灰质区域的敏感性值的平均值(MS)和标准差(SD)。对于死后受试者,MS和SD在所有受试者中进行统计学比较。定性分析表明,除了对死后数据的自适应方法显示出强烈的伪影外,两种方法之间没有差异。在噪声水平为20%的情况下,模拟数据显示中部地区的噪声增加。定量分析显示,在k=1和k=2时,死后脑图像的MS和SD均无统计学差异,但在k=2时,目视检查显示有边界伪影。此外,随着k的增加,RMSE(在线圈附近区域)降低,(在中心区域和整体QSM上)增加。总之,对于没有参考资料的多个线圈的相位图像重建,需要替代方法。在本研究中发现,总的来说,k=1的相组合优于k的其他幂。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Evaluation of multi-channel phase reconstruction methods for quantitative susceptibility mapping on postmortem human brain

Evaluation of multi-channel phase reconstruction methods for quantitative susceptibility mapping on postmortem human brain

Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping (QSM) is an established Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) technique with high potential in brain iron studies associated to several neurodegenerative diseases. Unlike other MRI techniques, QSM relies on phase images to estimate tissue's relative susceptibility, therefore requiring a reliable phase data. Phase images from a multi-channel acquisition should be reconstructed in a proper way. On this work it was compared the performance of combination of phase matching algorithms (MCPC3D-S and VRC) and phase combination methods based on a complex weighted sum of phases, considering the magnitude at different powers (k = 0 to 4) as the weighting factor. These reconstruction methods were applied in two datasets: a simulated brain dataset for a 4-coil array and data of 22 postmortem subjects acquired at a 7T scanner using a 32 channels coil. For the simulated dataset, differences between the ground truth and the Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) were evaluated. For both simulated and postmortem data, the mean (MS) and standard deviation (SD) of susceptibility values of five deep gray matter regions were calculated. For the postmortem subjects, MS and SD were statistically compared across all subjects. A qualitative analysis indicated no differences between methods, except for the Adaptive approach on postmortem data, which showed intense artifacts. In the 20% noise level case, the simulated data showed increased noise in central regions. Quantitative analysis showed that both MS and SD were not statistically different when comparing k=1 and k=2 on postmortem brain images, however visual inspection showed some boundaries artifacts on k=2. Furthermore, the RMSE decreased (on regions near the coils) and increased (on central regions and on overall QSM) with increasing k. In conclusion, for reconstruction of phase images from multiple coils with no reference available, alternative methods are needed. In this study it was found that overall, the phase combination with k=1 is preferred over other powers of k.

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
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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