Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Jordan Hamm (BA, BSc) University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia Alexandra Reichenbach (MSc, Dipl-Ing) Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Tuebingen,

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Jordan Hamm (BA, BSc) University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia Alexandra Reichenbach (MSc, Dipl-Ing) Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Tuebingen,"— Presentation transcript:

1 Jordan Hamm (BA, BSc) University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia Alexandra Reichenbach (MSc, Dipl-Ing) Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Tuebingen, Germany

2  Technical considerations  Mean ADC values, FA, and tract volume as measurements  Application  Rationale of the project  Approaches ▪ Automatized / manual ▪ Tract / ROI based  Results  Conclusions

3 What is b-value? -higher b-values may probe different diffusion -more sensitive to differences in restricted (Assaf, 2004) Do more angles provide any benefit beyond more SNR? -i.e. are more gradient directions just redundant? -6 dir(8 times) or 50 directions (1 time)? Is motion correction effective? - Leemans vector table rotation

4 What effect does b-value, angular resolution, and motion correction have on common diffusion metrics? - Scanned 2 subjects - Compared parameters in -tract reconstructions -5x5mm ROIs for maximum sensitivity

5 6 dir, b1200 50 dir, b120050 dir, b2400 Raw Motion Corrected Qualitative analyses -Tracts produced with FACT algorithm (BF approach) using tensors in 6 direction data and using non-negativity constrained spherical de-convolution in 50 direction data.

6 First compared average FA of a tract to overall tract volume As volume of a tract increases, overall average FA of that tract decreases - so tract integrity is not necessarily revealed in a tract based analysis. Instead, tract volume and/or number of “tracts” are best used for tract based analyses

7 Initially, b-value didn’t appear to affect tractability…. But…. Assessed number of voxels involved in each reconstructed tract from each scan.

8 Motion correction (12 parameter) with vector table rotation reveals benefit of higher b-values (Leemans and Jones, 2009)

9 Motion correction appears to improve tracking, but differentially for different b-values. Why? - longer scans  more movement? - b2400 scan 10% longer (2 min) -higher b-values are more sensitive -scan artifacts

10 Manual selection of 3x3 voxel ROI Compared between b-values, ang. res., and raw/motion corrected data -Mean diffusivity (verified with known values) -FA estimate

11 Mean diffusivity variable between b=1200 and b=2400 before motion correction -Overall variance of ADC values reduced after motion correction -also closer to prescribed 7.0 X 10^-4 (Johansen-Berg and Behrmans, 2009) -B=2400 with motion correction is best -ROI close to CSF, to which lower b-values are more sensitive. -Again, differential effects of motion correction seen

12 -Higher b-values yield more consistent measure of fractional anisotropy across subjects -Some anisotropy captured by low b-values could be non-axonal which does not contribute to long range tractography -lower b-values have more “hindered” and less “restricted” Why does FA in a voxel cluster decrease with more resolution, but tract volume increase?

13 Learning aims  Learn different DTI analysis software and their strengths & weaknesses  Explore a real scientific question with different DTI approaches  Get to know pitfalls and possible difficulties on real data Haxby et al. (2000)

14 Avidan & Behrmann (2009)  Familiar vs. unknown faces elicit specific BOLD activation in healthy controls but not in CP patients in  left precuneus/posterior cingulate cortex  anterior paracingulate cortex  Outside the ‘core system’ for face processing  Hypothesis Structural changes in white matter tracts between these regions might underlie the functional differences  Target tract: Cingulum

15  Measurements (for ROIs or tracts)  Fractional anisotrophy (FA)  Radial diffusivity (RD)  Transverse diffusitivity (TD)  Number of detected fibers (# fibers)  Number of voxels within detected tract (# voxels)  Approaches  Automatic fiber seeding based on fMRI group coordinates  Extraction of cingulum fibers based on anatomy (manual seeding)  ROI analysis of sup. cingulum with automatic seeding based on standard space coordinates  (probabilistic tracking from fMRI group coordinates, FSL)  Data: previously acquired from 17 controls & 6 patients  TR/TE = 4900/82ms; 6 directions; b = 850 s/mm 2 ; 1.6*1.6*3mm voxel size  Is this angular resolution sufficient for these regions (fiber crossing!)?

16  Transformation of fMRI MNI coordinates in native space (FSL FLIRT)  Construction of spheric ROIs around these coordinates (MATLAB)  Extraction of tracts traversing both ROIs (ExploreDTI)  Only about 1/3 of the subjects had tractable fibers  Increasing the radius of the ROI did not solve the problem background: FA values precuneus / posterior cingulate cortex anterior paracingulate cortex ROIs: 18mm diameter

17  Analysis with DTI Studio, manual seeding by 2 independent investigators  Comparison of left & right cingulum in healthy controls and DTI patients  Results (whole tracts as ROI)  Inter-rater reliability: >.8  No group differences in corpus callosum (CC) ▪ control tract  FA & TD larger in left than in right cingulum ▪ consistent with literature  Significant differences in # fibers total   in line with fMRI data: no activation of left precuneus / PCC in patients ( *) *

18  Analysis with Explore DTI, MNI coord of ROI transformed in native space  Results (only ROI voxels included)  Larger FA value left than right in controls can be explained by a smaller RD  fibers more directed  TD left in CP patients smaller than in controls  fibers more directed in controls  in line with fMRI data: activation of left precuneus/PCC in controls but not in patients

19  Automatic seeding based on fMRI data fails  Possibly due to large inter-individual differences – BUT no individual fMRI available  Possibly due to insufficient tractability with 6 direction data – higher angular resolution data is acquired at the moment  ExploreDTI can model multiple fibers in a voxel (CSD)  Analysis data-driven, no operator bias  Manual cingulum tracking  High inter-rater reliability due to ‘standardized’ method of ROI definition  DTI Studio: easy-to-use & user-friendly GUI, ideal for exploration and manual intervention BUT supports only tensor model  Results in controls are consistent with literature  Automatic seeded ROI analysis  No manual intervention, no operator bias  Besides ILF and IFOF the left cingulum is another tract involved in face processing that seems to be compromised in CP patients

20  Seong-Gi Kim & Bill Eddy  Kwan-Jin Jung  Marlene Behrmann  John Migliozzi  Tomika Cohen  Rebecca Clark  NIH


Download ppt "Jordan Hamm (BA, BSc) University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia Alexandra Reichenbach (MSc, Dipl-Ing) Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Tuebingen,"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google