首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     


Comparison of fMRI coregistration results between human experts and software solutions in patients and healthy subjects
Authors:Andreas Gartus  Alexander Geissler  Thomas Foki  Amir Reza Tahamtan  Gerald Pahs  Markus Barth  Katja Pinker  Siegfried Trattnig  Roland Beisteiner
Affiliation:(1) Study Group Clinical fMRI at the Departments of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Radiology, MR Center of Excellence, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090 Vienna, Austria;(2) Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Functional Brain Topography, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090 Vienna, Austria;(3) Department of Neurology, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090 Vienna, Austria;(4) Department of Radiology, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090 Vienna, Austria;(5) FC Donders Centre for Cognitive Neuroimaging, Radboud University, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB Nijmegan, The Netherlands
Abstract:
Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) performed by echo-planar imaging (EPI) is often highly distorted, and it is therefore necessary to coregister the functional to undistorted anatomical images, especially for clinical applications. This pilot study provides an evaluation of human and automatic coregistration results in the human motor cortex of normal and pathological brains. Ten healthy right-handed subjects and ten right-handed patients performed simple right hand movements during fMRI. A reference point chosen at a characteristic anatomical location within the fMRI sensorimotor activations was transferred to the high resolution anatomical MRI images by three human fMRI experts and by three automatic coregistration programs. The 3D distance between the median localizations of experts and programs was calculated and compared between patients and healthy subjects. Results show that fMRI localization on anatomical images was better with the experts than software in 70% of the cases and that software performance was worse for patients than healthy subjects (unpaired t-test: P = 0.040). With 45.6 mm the maximum disagreement between experts and software was quite large. The inter-rater consistency was better for the fMRI experts compared to the coregistration programs (ANOVA: P = 0.003). We conclude that results of automatic coregistration should be evaluated carefully, especially in case of clinical application.
Keywords:Functional MRI  3D linear coregistration  Clinical brain mapping  Healthy subjects  Patients
本文献已被 PubMed SpringerLink 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号