Purpose: To compare registration strategies to align arterial spin labeling (ASL) with 3D T1-weighted (T1w) images, with the goal of reducing the between-subject variability of cerebral blood flow (CBF) images. Materials and Methods: Multi-center 3T ASL data were collected at eight sites with four different sequences in the multi-center GENetic Frontotemporal dementia Initiative (GENFI) study. In a total of 48 healthy controls, we compared the following image registration options: (I) which images to use for registration (perfusion-weighted images [PWI] to the segmented gray matter (GM) probability map (pGM) (CBF-pGM) or M0 to T1w (M0-T1w); (II) which transformation to use (rigid-body or non-rigid); and (III) whether to mask or not (no masking, M0-based FMRIB software library Brain Extraction Tool [BET] masking). In addition to visual comparison, we quantified image similarity using the Pearson correlation coefficient (CC), and used the Mann-Whitney U rank sum test. Results: CBF-pGM outperformed M0-T1w (CC improvement 47.2% ± 22.0%; P < 0.001), and the non-rigid transformation outperformed rigid-body (20.6% ± 5.3%; P < 0.001). Masking only improved the M0-T1w rigid-body registration (14.5% ± 15.5%; P = 0.007). Conclusion: The choice of image registration strategy impacts ASL group analyses. The non-rigid transformation is promising but requires validation. CBF-pGM rigid-body registration without masking can be used as a default strategy. In patients with expansive perfusion deficits, M0-T1w may outperform CBF-pGM in sequences with high effective spatial resolution. BET-masking only improves M0-T1w registration when the M0 image has sufficient contrast. Level of Evidence: 1. Technical Efficacy: Stage 1. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2018;47:131–140.

Comparison of arterial spin labeling registration strategies in the multi-center GENetic frontotemporal dementia initiative (GENFI) / Mutsaerts, H. J. M. M.; Petr, J.; Thomas, D. L.; De Vita, E.; Cash, D. M.; van Osch, M. J. P.; Golay, X.; Groot, P. F. C.; Ourselin, S.; van Swieten, J.; Laforce, R.; Tagliavini, F.; Borroni, B.; Galimberti, D.; Rowe, J. B.; Graff, C.; Pizzini, F. B.; Finger, E.; Sorbi, S.; Castelo Branco, M.; Rohrer, J. D.; Masellis, M.; Macintosh, B. J.; Rossor, M.; Fox, N.; Warren, J.; Bocchetta, M.; Dick, K.; Pievani, M.; Ghidoni, R.; Benussi, L.; Padovani, A.; Cosseddu, M.; Mendonca, A.; Frisoni, G.; Premi, E.; Archetti, S.; Scarpini, E.; Fumagalli, G.; Arighi, A.; Fenoglio, C.; Prioni, S.; Redaelii, V.; Grisoli, M.; Tiraboschi, P.; Black, S.; Rogaeva, E.; Freedman, M.; Tartaglia, M. C.; Tang-Wai, D.; Keren, R.; Panman, J.; Meeter, L.; Jiskoot, L.; van Minkelen, R.; Lombardi, G.; Polito, C.; Nacmias, B.; Jelic, V.; Andersson, C.; Oijerstedt, L.; Fallstrom, M.; Thonberg, H.; Verdelho, A.; Maruta, C.. - In: JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING. - ISSN 1053-1807. - 47:1(2018), pp. 131-140. [10.1002/jmri.25751]

Comparison of arterial spin labeling registration strategies in the multi-center GENetic frontotemporal dementia initiative (GENFI)

Fumagalli G.;
2018-01-01

Abstract

Purpose: To compare registration strategies to align arterial spin labeling (ASL) with 3D T1-weighted (T1w) images, with the goal of reducing the between-subject variability of cerebral blood flow (CBF) images. Materials and Methods: Multi-center 3T ASL data were collected at eight sites with four different sequences in the multi-center GENetic Frontotemporal dementia Initiative (GENFI) study. In a total of 48 healthy controls, we compared the following image registration options: (I) which images to use for registration (perfusion-weighted images [PWI] to the segmented gray matter (GM) probability map (pGM) (CBF-pGM) or M0 to T1w (M0-T1w); (II) which transformation to use (rigid-body or non-rigid); and (III) whether to mask or not (no masking, M0-based FMRIB software library Brain Extraction Tool [BET] masking). In addition to visual comparison, we quantified image similarity using the Pearson correlation coefficient (CC), and used the Mann-Whitney U rank sum test. Results: CBF-pGM outperformed M0-T1w (CC improvement 47.2% ± 22.0%; P < 0.001), and the non-rigid transformation outperformed rigid-body (20.6% ± 5.3%; P < 0.001). Masking only improved the M0-T1w rigid-body registration (14.5% ± 15.5%; P = 0.007). Conclusion: The choice of image registration strategy impacts ASL group analyses. The non-rigid transformation is promising but requires validation. CBF-pGM rigid-body registration without masking can be used as a default strategy. In patients with expansive perfusion deficits, M0-T1w may outperform CBF-pGM in sequences with high effective spatial resolution. BET-masking only improves M0-T1w registration when the M0 image has sufficient contrast. Level of Evidence: 1. Technical Efficacy: Stage 1. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2018;47:131–140.
2018
1
Mutsaerts, H. J. M. M.; Petr, J.; Thomas, D. L.; De Vita, E.; Cash, D. M.; van Osch, M. J. P.; Golay, X.; Groot, P. F. C.; Ourselin, S.; van Swieten, J.; Laforce, R.; Tagliavini, F.; Borroni, B.; Galimberti, D.; Rowe, J. B.; Graff, C.; Pizzini, F. B.; Finger, E.; Sorbi, S.; Castelo Branco, M.; Rohrer, J. D.; Masellis, M.; Macintosh, B. J.; Rossor, M.; Fox, N.; Warren, J.; Bocchetta, M.; Dick, K.; Pievani, M.; Ghidoni, R.; Benussi, L.; Padovani, A.; Cosseddu, M.; Mendonca, A.; Frisoni, G.; Premi, E.; Archetti, S.; Scarpini, E.; Fumagalli, G.; Arighi, A.; Fenoglio, C.; Prioni, S.; Redaelii, V.; Grisoli, M.; Tiraboschi, P.; Black, S.; Rogaeva, E.; Freedman, M.; Tartaglia, M. C.; Tang-Wai, D.; Keren, R.; Panman, J.; Meeter, L.; Jiskoot, L.; van Minkelen, R.; Lombardi, G.; Polito, C.; Nacmias, B.; Jelic, V.; Andersson, C.; Oijerstedt, L.; Fallstrom, M.; Thonberg, H.; Verdelho, A.; Maruta, C.
Comparison of arterial spin labeling registration strategies in the multi-center GENetic frontotemporal dementia initiative (GENFI) / Mutsaerts, H. J. M. M.; Petr, J.; Thomas, D. L.; De Vita, E.; Cash, D. M.; van Osch, M. J. P.; Golay, X.; Groot, P. F. C.; Ourselin, S.; van Swieten, J.; Laforce, R.; Tagliavini, F.; Borroni, B.; Galimberti, D.; Rowe, J. B.; Graff, C.; Pizzini, F. B.; Finger, E.; Sorbi, S.; Castelo Branco, M.; Rohrer, J. D.; Masellis, M.; Macintosh, B. J.; Rossor, M.; Fox, N.; Warren, J.; Bocchetta, M.; Dick, K.; Pievani, M.; Ghidoni, R.; Benussi, L.; Padovani, A.; Cosseddu, M.; Mendonca, A.; Frisoni, G.; Premi, E.; Archetti, S.; Scarpini, E.; Fumagalli, G.; Arighi, A.; Fenoglio, C.; Prioni, S.; Redaelii, V.; Grisoli, M.; Tiraboschi, P.; Black, S.; Rogaeva, E.; Freedman, M.; Tartaglia, M. C.; Tang-Wai, D.; Keren, R.; Panman, J.; Meeter, L.; Jiskoot, L.; van Minkelen, R.; Lombardi, G.; Polito, C.; Nacmias, B.; Jelic, V.; Andersson, C.; Oijerstedt, L.; Fallstrom, M.; Thonberg, H.; Verdelho, A.; Maruta, C.. - In: JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING. - ISSN 1053-1807. - 47:1(2018), pp. 131-140. [10.1002/jmri.25751]
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
2018 Mutsaerts et al.pdf

Solo gestori archivio

Tipologia: Versione editoriale (Publisher’s layout)
Licenza: Tutti i diritti riservati (All rights reserved)
Dimensione 783.8 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
783.8 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri
emss-79878.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Post-print referato (Refereed author’s manuscript)
Licenza: Tutti i diritti riservati (All rights reserved)
Dimensione 1.97 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.97 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11572/355948
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 24
  • Scopus 33
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 32
social impact