Literature DB >> 19577395

Dependence of the fractional anisotropy in cervical spine from the number of diffusion gradients, repeated acquisition and voxel size.

Xenja Santarelli1, Gabriele Garbin, Maja Ukmar, Renata Longo.   

Abstract

The aim of this study is to investigate the consequences of using different gradient schemes, number of repeated measurements and voxel size on the fractional anisotropy (FA) value in a diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) sequence on the cervical tract of the spinal cord. Twenty healthy volunteers underwent a total of 86 DTI axial acquisitions performed by using different voxel size and number of diffusion gradient directions (NDGDs). Three different diffusion gradient schemes were applied, named 6, 15 and 32 according to the NDGD. Furthermore, some acquisitions were repeated to investigate the effects of image averaging on FA value. Our results indicate that the FA value in the cervical spinal cord decreases when increasing the NDGD for a fixed spatial resolution, or when identical acquisitions are repeated, thus, increasing the acquisition time. This effect is observed in all subjects without exceptions, and the differences result statistically significant: the average FA obtained from 6, 15 and 32 NDGD is 0.84 (range, 0.82-0.87), 0.75 (range, 0.68-0.80) and 0.70 (range, 0.65-0.77), respectively, for isotropic 8 mm(3) voxel size. When varying the spatial resolution in a volume range of 2 to 8 mm(3) for a fixed NDGD (6 or 15), the differences in FA values are smaller albeit still statistically significant: the smaller the voxel, the larger the FA. No significant dependence of the FA value from the spatial resolution is observed in the 32 NDGD acquisitions in the studied volume range. In conclusion, our results indicate that the value of the FA in the cervical tract of the spinal cord vary with regularity in intrasubject acquisitions when modifying the NDGD and when repeated acquisitions are used; these observations confirm that the signal-to-noise ratio introduces a systematic error in FA measurements that does not allow simple comparison of quantitative results obtained from separated studies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19577395     DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2009.05.046

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging        ISSN: 0730-725X            Impact factor:   2.546


  16 in total

1.  Diffusion tensor imaging and fibre tracking in cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

Authors:  Jean-François Budzik; Vincent Balbi; Vianney Le Thuc; Alain Duhamel; Richard Assaker; Anne Cotten
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-08-20       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Analysis and correction of gradient nonlinearity bias in apparent diffusion coefficient measurements.

Authors:  Dariya I Malyarenko; Brian D Ross; Thomas L Chenevert
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 4.668

3.  Fiber density index in the evaluation of the spinal cord in patients with multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  M Ukmar; A Montalbano; E Makuc; I Specogna; A Bratina; R Longo; M A Cova
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2012-06-28       Impact factor: 3.469

4.  Analysis of the diffusion tensor imaging parameters of a normal cervical spinal cord in a healthy population.

Authors:  Liang-Feng Wei; Shou-Sen Wang; Zhao-Cong Zheng; Jun Tian; Liang Xue
Journal:  J Spinal Cord Med       Date:  2016-11-04       Impact factor: 1.985

5.  Assessment of reduced field of view in diffusion tensor imaging of the lumbar nerve roots at 3 T.

Authors:  Jean-François Budzik; Sébastien Verclytte; Guillaume Lefebvre; Aurélien Monnet; Gerard Forzy; Anne Cotten
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-11-18       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Quantifying the impact of underlying measurement error on cervical spinal cord diffusion tensor imaging at 3T.

Authors:  Samantha By; Alex K Smith; Lindsey M Dethrage; Bailey D Lyttle; Bennett A Landman; Jeffrey L Creasy; Siddharama Pawate; Seth A Smith
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2016-05-18       Impact factor: 4.813

7.  High resolution diffusion tensor imaging of human nerves in forearm.

Authors:  Yuxiang Zhou; Ponnada A Narayana; Manickam Kumaravel; Parveen Athar; Vipulkumar S Patel; Kazim A Sheikh
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2013-11-14       Impact factor: 4.813

8.  The impact of post-processing on spinal cord diffusion tensor imaging.

Authors:  Siawoosh Mohammadi; Patrick Freund; Thorsten Feiweier; Armin Curt; Nikolaus Weiskopf
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2013-01-05       Impact factor: 6.556

9.  Effect of increasing diffusion gradient direction number on diffusion tensor imaging fiber tracking in the human brain.

Authors:  Xufeng Yao; Tonggang Yu; Beibei Liang; Tian Xia; Qinming Huang; Songlin Zhuang
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2015-02-27       Impact factor: 3.500

10.  Normal variation of diffusion tensor parameters of the spinal cord in healthy subjects at 3.0-Tesla.

Authors:  T Uda; T Takami; S Sakamoto; N Tsuyuguchi; T Yamagata; K Ohata
Journal:  J Craniovertebr Junction Spine       Date:  2011-07
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.