OBJECT: 1. Identify sources of variation affecting Magnetisation Transfer Ratio (MTR) histogram reproducibility between-centres. 2. Demonstrate complete elimination of inter-centre difference. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six principle sources of variation were summarised and analysed. These are: the imager coil used for radiofrequency (RF) transmission, imager stability, the shape and other parameters describing the Magnetisation Transfer (MT) pulse, the MT sequence used (including its parameters), the image segmentation methodology, and the histogram generation technique. Transmit field nonuniformity and B1 errors are often the largest factors. PLUMB (Peak Location Uniformity in MTR histograms of the Brain) plots are a convenient way of visualising differences. Five multi-centres studies were undertaken to investigate and minimise differences. RESULTS: Transmission using a body coil, with a close-fitting array of surface coils for reception, gave the best uniformity. Differences between two centres, having MR imagers from different manufacturers, were completely eliminated by using body coil excitation, making a small adjustment to the MT pulse flip angle, and carrying out segmentation at a single centre. Histograms and their peak location and height values were indistinguishable. CONCLUSIONS: Body coil excitation is preferred for multi-centre studies. Analysis (segmentation and histogram generation) should ideally be carried out at a single site.
OBJECT: 1. Identify sources of variation affecting Magnetisation Transfer Ratio (MTR) histogram reproducibility between-centres. 2. Demonstrate complete elimination of inter-centre difference. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six principle sources of variation were summarised and analysed. These are: the imager coil used for radiofrequency (RF) transmission, imager stability, the shape and other parameters describing the Magnetisation Transfer (MT) pulse, the MT sequence used (including its parameters), the image segmentation methodology, and the histogram generation technique. Transmit field nonuniformity and B1 errors are often the largest factors. PLUMB (Peak Location Uniformity in MTR histograms of the Brain) plots are a convenient way of visualising differences. Five multi-centres studies were undertaken to investigate and minimise differences. RESULTS: Transmission using a body coil, with a close-fitting array of surface coils for reception, gave the best uniformity. Differences between two centres, having MR imagers from different manufacturers, were completely eliminated by using body coil excitation, making a small adjustment to the MT pulse flip angle, and carrying out segmentation at a single centre. Histograms and their peak location and height values were indistinguishable. CONCLUSIONS: Body coil excitation is preferred for multi-centre studies. Analysis (segmentation and histogram generation) should ideally be carried out at a single site.
Authors: M P Sormani; G Iannucci; M A Rocca; G Mastronardo; M Cercignani; L Minicucci; M Filippi Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2000-01 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: M A van Buchem; J K Udupa; J C McGowan; Y Miki; F H Heyning; M P Boncoeur-Martel; D L Kolson; M Polansky; R I Grossman Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 1997-08 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: J H van Waesberghe; M A van Buchem; M Filippi; J A Castelijns; M A Rocca; R van der Boom; C H Polman; F Barkhof Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 1998 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Rebecca S Samson; Claudia A M Wheeler-Kingshott; Mark R Symms; Daniel J Tozer; Paul S Tofts Journal: Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2005-12-27 Impact factor: 2.546
Authors: Andrew L Alexander; Samuel A Hurley; Alexey A Samsonov; Nagesh Adluru; Ameer Pasha Hosseinbor; Pouria Mossahebi; Do P M Tromp; Elizabeth Zakszewski; Aaron S Field Journal: Brain Connect Date: 2012-01-27
Authors: Joëlle K Barral; Erik Gudmundson; Nikola Stikov; Maryam Etezadi-Amoli; Petre Stoica; Dwight G Nishimura Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Ying Wu; Hongyan Du; Pippa Storey; Christopher Glielmi; Fiona Malone; Shawn Sidharthan; Ann Ragin; Paul S Tofts; Robert R Edelman Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2011-10-11 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Kelly H Zou; Hongyan Du; Shawn Sidharthan; Lisa M Detora; Yunmei Chen; Ann B Ragin; Robert R Edelman; Ying Wu Journal: Int J Biomed Imaging Date: 2010-02-09
Authors: Jacqueline Tien-Hsiang Chen; Kathryn Easley; Colleen Schneider; Kunio Nakamura; Grahame J Kidd; Ansi Chang; Susan M Staugaitis; Robert J Fox; Elizabeth Fisher; Douglas L Arnold; Bruce D Trapp Journal: Neurology Date: 2012-12-26 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: M O Leach; B Morgan; P S Tofts; D L Buckley; W Huang; M A Horsfield; T L Chenevert; D J Collins; A Jackson; D Lomas; B Whitcher; L Clarke; R Plummer; I Judson; R Jones; R Alonzi; T Brunner; D M Koh; P Murphy; J C Waterton; G Parker; M J Graves; T W J Scheenen; T W Redpath; M Orton; G Karczmar; H Huisman; J Barentsz; A Padhani Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2012-05-07 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Klaus Schmierer; Claudia A M Wheeler-Kingshott; Daniel J Tozer; Phil A Boulby; Harold G Parkes; Tarek A Yousry; Francesco Scaravilli; Gareth J Barker; Paul S Tofts; David H Miller Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2008-02 Impact factor: 4.668