Literature DB >> 25977801

Multi-modal ultra-high resolution structural 7-Tesla MRI data repository.

Birte U Forstmann1, Max C Keuken1, Andreas Schafer2, Pierre-Louis Bazin2, Anneke Alkemade3, Robert Turner2.   

Abstract

Structural brain data is key for the understanding of brain function and networks, i.e., connectomics. Here we present data sets available from the 'atlasing of the basal ganglia (ATAG)' project, which provides ultra-high resolution 7 Tesla (T) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans from young, middle-aged, and elderly participants. The ATAG data set includes whole-brain and reduced field-of-view MP2RAGE and T2*-weighted scans of the subcortex and brainstem with ultra-high resolution at a sub-millimeter scale. The data can be used to develop new algorithms that help building high-resolution atlases both relevant for the basic and clinical neurosciences. Importantly, the present data repository may also be used to inform the exact positioning of electrodes used for deep-brain-stimulation in patients with Parkinson's disease and neuropsychiatric diseases.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25977801      PMCID: PMC4421933          DOI: 10.1038/sdata.2014.50

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Data        ISSN: 2052-4463            Impact factor:   6.444


Background & Summary

Large collaborative projects between scientific groups spread around the world are aimed to increase our understanding of the human brain. Large human connectome studies[1-3] are in place working to clarify the connectivity within the human brain using a multi-modal approach ranging from structural brain imaging to genetics (http://www.humanconnectomeproject.org). However, to fully understand the connectivity of the brain, we need a higher level of anatomical detail than currently available. The lack of knowledge about small brain structures, especially subcortical structures, is reflected by their absence from brain atlases currently available for MRI research[4,5]. A comparison of subcortical grey matter structures depicted in standard MRI-atlases with the structures defined in the Federative Community on Anatomical Terminology[6] yielded an overlap of only seven percent. One important explanation for this discrepancy is the absence of ultra-high resolution MRI data allowing the direct visualization of small nuclei in the subcortex. A second important reason is the lack of automated analytical protocols available for MRI-data segmentation, with the resulting necessity of laborious studies performed by trained anatomists for the identification of subcortical brain areas. Thirdly, besides the lack of anatomical knowledge, there is no information about age-related changes in, e.g., volume or location of subcortical structures. Recent exciting advancements in the field of ultra-high resolution magnetic resonance imaging at 7 Tesla (or higher) allow in vivo neuroimaging of the human brain with unprecedented anatomical detail[7-11]. Here we share information of a multi-modal data set of three different groups of young, middle-aged, and elderly participants who were scanned with a 7 T MRI scanner. The data sets contain three different age groups and can be used to investigate anatomical changes due to healthy aging. The data sets have already been used to create probabilistic atlas maps including the striatum, globus pallidus interna and externa, the substantia nigra, the subthalamic, and the red nucleus. All probabilistic atlas maps are available online (https://www.nitrc.org/projects/atag/ and http://fsl.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/fsl/fslwiki/Atlases). In addition to the manual segmentations, the data can be used to develop new algorithms that help building high-resolution subcortical brain atlases that can be directly applied in both the basic and clinical neurosciences. Finally, the data can be used to guide the exact positioning of electrodes relevant for deep-brain-stimulation often used in patients with Parkinson’s disease and neuropsychiatric diseases[12-14].

Methods

Participants

For the acquisition of the structural brain scans, 30 young participants (14 females) with mean age 23.8 (s.d. 2.3), 14 middle-aged (7 females) with mean age 52.5 (s.d. 6.6), and 10 elderly (3 females) with mean age 69.6 (s.d. 4.6) were included (Table 1). All participants had normal or corrected-to-normal vision, and none of them suffered from neurological, psychiatric, or somatic diseases. All subjects were right-handed, as confirmed by the Edinburgh Inventory[15]. The study was approved by the local ethics committee at the University of Leipzig, Germany. All participants gave their written informed consent prior to scanning and received a monetary compensation.
Table 1

Demographic information of participants.

Age Group Participant Gender Age
1pp01Female23
pp02Female23
pp03Female25
pp04Female23
pp05Male27
pp06Female23
pp07Male27
pp08Female24
pp09Male24
pp10Male22
pp11Female25
pp12Female24
pp13Male24
pp14Male26
pp15Male23
pp16Female25
pp17Female19
pp18Male23
pp19Male21
pp20Male25
pp21Male24
pp22Male28
pp23Male28
pp24Female22
pp25Female19
pp26Female21
pp27Male25
pp28Female21
pp29Male26
pp30Male23
2pp31Female56
pp32Female60
pp33Female58
pp34Male40
pp35Male42
pp36Male60
pp37Female59
pp38Female49
pp39Female45
pp40Female55
pp41Male55
pp42Male49
pp43Male54
pp44Male53
3pp45Female74
pp46Male63
pp47Female62
pp48Male72
pp49Male67
pp50Male75
pp51Male69
pp52Male68
pp53Female73

Scan parameters

The structural data were acquired using a 7 T Siemens Magnetom MRI scanner using a 24-channel head array Nova coil (NOVA Medical Inc., Wilmington MA) and consisted of three sequences: a whole-brain MP2RAGE, a MP2RAGE covering a smaller slab[16,17], and a multi-echo 3D FLASH[18]. The whole-brain MP2RAGE had 240 sagittal slices with an acquisition time of 10:57 min (repetition time (TR)=5,000 ms; echo time (TE)=2.45 ms; inversion times TI1/TI2=900/2,750 ms; flip angle=5°/3°; bandwidth=250 Hz/Px; voxel size=(0.7 mm)3; Table 2 (available online only)). The MP2RAGE slab consisted of 128 slices with an acquisition time of 9:07 min (TR=5,000 ms; TE=3.71 ms; TI1/TI2=900/2,750 ms; flip angle=5°/3°; bandwidth=240 Hz/Px; voxel size=(0.6 mm)3; Table 3 (available online only)). The FLASH slab consisted of 128 slices with an acquisition time of 17:18 min (TR=41 ms and three different echo times (TE): 11.22/20.39/29.57 ms; flip angle=14°; bandwidth=160 Hz/Px; voxel size=(0.5 mm)3; Table 4 (available online only)). Both slab sequences consisted of axial slices tilted −23 degrees to the true axial plane in scanner coordinates. This angle in combination with the used field of view ensured that the entire Basal Ganglia were scanned. To get a better inversion of the magnetization in the lower parts of the brain (e.g., the Cerebellum), a TR-FOCI inversion pulse was implemented in the MP2RAGE sequence[16].
Table 2

Exam card MP2RAGE whole-brain scan

General
 TA10:57
 PAT2
 Voxel size0.7×0.7×0.7 mm
 Rel. SNR1.0
 
Properties
 Prio ReconOff
 Load to viewerOn
 Inline movieOff
 Auto store imagesOn
 Load to stamp segmentsOff
 Load images to graphic segmentsOff
 Auto open inline displayOff
 Start measurement without further preparationOn
 Wait for user to startOff
 Start measurementssingle
 
Routine
 Slab group 1
  Slabs1
  Dist. factor50%
  PositionIsocenter
  OrientationSagittal
  Phase enc. dir.A >> P
  Rotation0.00 deg
 Phase oversampling0%
 Slice oversampling0.0%
 Slices per slab240
 FoV read224 mm
 FoV phase100.0%
 Slice thickness0.70 mm
 TR5,000 ms
 TE2.45 ms
 Averages1
 Concatenations1
 FilterNone
 Coil elementsA24
 
Contrast
 Magn. PreparationNon-sel. IR
 TI 1900 ms
 TI 22,750 ms
 Flip angle 15 deg
 Flip angle 23 deg
 Fat suppr.Water excit. normal
 Water suppr.None
 2nd Inversion-ContrastOn
 Averaging modeLong term
 ReconstructionMagnitiude
 Measurements1
 Multiple seriesEach measurement
 
Resolution
 Base resolution320
 Phase resolution100%
 Slice resolution100%
 Phase partial Fourier6/8
 Slice partial FourierOff
 InterpolationOff
 PAT modeGRAPPA
 Accel. factor PE2
 Ref. lines PE24
 Accel. factor 3D1
 Reference scan modeIntegrated
 Image FilterOff
 Distortion Corr.Off
 Prescan NormalizeOff
 NormalizeOff
 B1 filterOff
 Raw filterOff
 Elliptical filterOff
 
Geometry
 Multi-slice modeSingle shot
 SeriesInterleaved
 Table positionH
 Table position0 mm
 Inline ComposingOff
 
System
 V24Off
 A24On
 Positioning modeFIX
 MSMAS-C-T
 SagittalR >>L
 CoronalA>>P
 TransversalF>>H
 Save uncombinedOff
 Coil Combine ModeAdaptive Combine
 AutoAlign---
 Auto Coil SelectOff
 Shim modeStandard
 Adjust with body coilOff
 Confirm freq. adjustmentOff
 Assume SiliconeOff
 ? Ref. amplitude 1H0.000 V
 Adjustment ToleranceAuto
 Adjust volume
  PositionIsocenter
  OrientationSagittal
  Rotation0.00 deg
  F>>H224 mm
  A>>P224 mm
  R>>L168 mm
 
Physio
 1st Signal/ModeNone
 Dark bloodOff
 Resp. controlOff
 
Inline
 SubtractOff
 Std-Dev-SagOff
 Std-Dev-CorOff
 Std-Dev-TraOff
 Std-Dev-TimeOff
 MIP-SagOff
 MIP-CorOff
 MIP-TraOff
 MIP-TimeOff
 Save original imagesOn
 
Sequence
 IntroductionOn
 Dimension3D
 Elliptical scanningOff
 Asymmetric echoAllowed
 Contrasts1
 Bandwidth250 Hz/Px
 Flow comp.No
 Echo spacing6.8 ms
 RF pulse typeFast
 Gradinet modeFast
 ExcitationNon-sel.
 RF spoilingOn
 FFT Scale Factor100%
 Line/Partition SwapOff
 Homodyne Phase FilterOff
 Flat ImageOn
 T1 MapOn
 Division ImageOff
 ExtInvPulseOnOn
 OffResFreqInv0
 Invflipangle1,700
Table 3

Exam card MP2RAGE slab.

General
 TA9:07
 PAT2
 Voxel size0.6×0.6×0.6 mm
 Rel. SNR1.0
 
Properties
 Prio ReconOff
 Load to viewerOn
 Inline movieOff
 Auto store imagesOn
 Load to stamp segmentsOff
 Load images to graphic segmentsOff
 Auto open inline displayOff
 Start measurement without further preparationOn
 Wait for user to startOff
 Start measurementssingle
 
Routine
 Slab group 1
  Slabs1
  Dist. factor50%
  PositionR2.4 A29.1 H23.0
  OrientationT>C-23.0
  Phase enc. dir.R>>L
  Rotation90.00 deg
 Phase oversampling0%
 Slice oversampling100.0%
 Slices per slab128
 FoV read192 mm
 FoV phase81.3%
 Slice thickness0.60 mm
 TR5,000 ms
 TE3.71 ms
 Averages1
 Concatenations1
 FilterNone
 Coil elementsA24
 
Contrast
 Magn. PreparationNon-sel. IR
 TI 1900 ms
 TI 22,750 ms
 Flip angle 15 deg
 Flip angle 23 deg
 Fat suppr.None
 Water suppr.None
 2nd Inversion-ContrastOn
 Averaging modeLong term
 ReconstructionMagnitiude
 Measurements1
 Multiple seriesEach measurement
 
Resolution
 Base resolution320
 Phase resolution100%
 Slice resolution100%
 Phase partial Fourier6/8
 Slice partial Fourier6/8
 InterpolationOff
 PAT modeGRAPPA
 Accel. factor PE2
 Ref. lines PE24
 Accel. factor 3D1
 Reference scan modeIntegrated
 Image FilterOff
 Distortion Corr.Off
 Prescan NormalizeOff
 NormalizeOff
 B1 filterOff
 Raw filterOff
 Elliptical filterOff
 
Geometry
 Multi-slice modeSingle shot
 SeriesInterleaved
 Table positionH
 Table position0 mm
 Inline ComposingOff
 
System
 V24Off
 A24On
 Positioning modeFIX
 MSMAS-C-T
 SagittalR >>L
 CoronalA>>P
 TransversalF>>H
 Save uncombinedOff
 Coil Combine ModeAdaptive Combine
 AutoAlign---
 Auto Coil SelectOff
 Shim modeStandard
 Adjust with body coilOff
 Confirm freq. adjustmentOff
 Assume SiliconeOff
 Ref. amplitude 1H0.000 V
 Adjustment ToleranceAuto
 Adjust volume
  PositionR2.4 A29.1 H23.0
  OrientationT>C-23.0
  Rotation90.00 deg
  A>>P192 mm
  R>>L156 mm
  F>>H77 mm
 
Physio
 1st Signal/ModeNone
 Dark bloodOff
 Resp. controlOff
 
Inline
 SubtractOff
 Std-Dev-SagOff
 Std-Dev-CorOff
 Std-Dev-TraOff
 Std-Dev-TimeOff
 MIP-SagOff
 MIP-CorOff
 MIP-TraOff
 MIP-TimeOff
 Save original imagesOn
 
Sequence
 IntroductionOn
 Dimension3D
 Elliptical scanningOff
 Asymmetric echoAllowed
 Contrasts1
 Bandwidth240 Hz/Px
 Flow comp.Slice
 Echo spacing7.5 ms
 RF pulse typeFast
 Gradinet modeWhisper
 ExcitationSlab-sel.
 RF spoilingOn
 FFT Scale Factor100%
 Line/Partition SwapOff
 Homodyne Phase FilterOff
 Flat ImageOn
 T1 MapOn
 Division ImageOff
 ExtInvPulseOnOn
 OffResFreqInv0
 Invflipangle1,800
Table 4

Exam card flash slab

General
 TA17:18
 PATOff
 Voxel size0.5×0.5×0.5 mm
 Rel. SNR1.0
 
Properties
 Prio ReconOff
 Load to viewerOn
 Inline movieOff
 Auto store imagesOn
 Load to stamp segmentsOff
 Load images to graphic segmentsOff
 Auto open inline displayOff
 Start measurement without further preparationOn
 Wait for user to startOff
 Start measurementssingle
 
Routine
 Slab group 1
  Slabs1
  Dist. factor20%
  PositionR2.4 A29.1 H23.0
  OrientationT>C-23.0
  Phase enc. dir.R>>L
  Rotation90.00 deg
 Phase oversampling0%
 Slice oversampling12.5%
 Slices per slab128
 FoV read192 mm
 FoV phase81.3%
 Slice thickness0.50 mm
 TR41 ms
 TE 111.22 ms
 TE 220.39 ms
 TE 329.57 ms
 Averages1
 Concatenations1
 FilterNone
 Coil elementsA24
 
Contrast
 MTCOff
 Magn. preperationNone
 Flip angle14 deg
 Fat suppr.None
 Water suppr.None
 SWIOff
 Averaging modeShort term
 ReconstructionMagn./Phase
 Measurements1
 Multiple seriesEach measurement
 
Resolution
 Base resolution384
 Phase resolution100%
 Slice resolution100%
 Phase partial Fourier6/8
 Slice partial Fourier6/8
 InterpolationOff
 PAT modeNone
 Image FilterOff
 Distortion Corr.Off
 Prescan NormalizeOff
 NormalizeOff
 B1 filterOff
 Raw filterOff
 Elliptical filterOff
 
Geometry
 Multi-slice modeInterleaved
 SeriesInterleaved
 Saturation modeStandard
 Special sat.None
 Table positionH
 Table position0 mm
 Inline ComposingOff
 Tim CT modeOff
 
System
 V24Off
 A24On
 Positioning modeREF
 MSMAS-C-T
 SagittalR >>L
 CoronalA>>P
 TransversalF>>H
 Save uncombinedOff
 Coil Combine ModeAdaptive Combine
 AutoAlign---
 Auto Coil SelectOff
 Shim modeStandard
 Adjust with body coilOff
 Confirm freq. adjustmentOff
 Assume SiliconeOff
 ? Ref. amplitude 1H0.000 V
 Adjustment ToleranceAuto
 Adjust volume
  PositionR2.4 A29.1 H23.0
  OrientationT>C-23.0
  Rotation90.00 deg
  A>>P192 mm
  R>>L156 mm
  F>>H64 mm
 
Physio
 1st Signal/ModeNone
 Segments1
 TaggingNone
 Dark bloodOff
 Resp. controlOff
 
Inline
 SubtractOff
 Liver registrationOff
 Std-Dev-SagOff
 Std-Dev-CorOff
 Std-Dev-TraOff
 Std-Dev-TimeOff
 MIP-SagOff
 MIP-CorOff
 MIP-TraOff
 MIP-TimeOff
 Save original imagesOn
 Wash – InOff
 Wash – OutOff
 TTPOff
 PEIOff
 MIP – timeOff
 MapItNone
 Contrasts3
 
Sequence
 IntroductionOn
 Dimension3D
 Elliptical scanningOff
 Phase stabilizationOn
 Asymmetric echoOff
 Bandwidth 1160 Hz/Px
 Bandwidth 2160 Hz/Px
 Bandwidth 3160 Hz/Px
 Flow comp. 1Yes
 Flow comp. 2No
 Flow comp. 3No
 Readout modeMonopolar
 RF pulse typeNormal
 Gradieet modeWhisper
 ExcitationSlab-sel.
 RF spoilingOn
 length exc pulse3,000 us
 Ernst Angle?On
 T11,300 ms
 FFT scale factor2.5
Unless indicated otherwise, all MRI data files were converted from DICOM to NIfTI format using an in-house dicom-to-nifti converter. This linux compatible converter is available via https://github.com/isis-group/isis.

Scan volumes

The MP2RAGE sequence results in four different volumes for each subject: INV1, INV2, UNI and T1. The INV1 volume reflects the gradient echo sequence with an inversion time of 900 ms. The INV2 volume reflects the gradient echo sequence with an inversion time of 2,750 ms. The UNI volume is the combined volume of the two inversion times. Finally, the T1 volume is a T1 estimation map derived from the two inversion times (Marques et al.[17]). The FLASH sequence results in two different volumes per echo time per subject resulting in nine different volumes in total. Besides the standard T2* weighted magnitude image, the phase images are also provided and can be used to calculate susceptibility weighted images as well as quantitative susceptibility maps (e.g., Deistung et al.[19]).

Data processing

All structural scans were anonymized by zeroing out the voxels in the vicinity of the facial surface, teeth, and auricles following a similar procedure as described by Hanke et al.[20] All data were reoriented to the standard MNI space using the fslreorient2std tool as implemented in fslutils 5.0.2 (Figure 1).
Figure 1

Data acquisition workflow.

Three different age groups were structurally scanned using a 7 T MRI scanner. Data acquisition was done in a single imaging session that lasted for approximately 37 min. This resulted in three different datasets: a whole brain T1-weighted MP2RAGE volume; a slab T1-weighted MP2RAGE volume, and a T2*-weighted flash volume. All structural data was anonymized and reoriented to standard MNI orientation (7 T MRI photo courtesy of Andreas Döring).

Data Records

All data records listed in this section are available from NITRIC (Data Citation 1) or Dryad (Data Citation 2). A README file with a detailed description of the content of all downloads is available in Dryad. Additional material and information are also provided in Data Citation 1 and Data Citation 2. Unless noted otherwise, all MRI data files were converted from DICOM to NIfTI format using an in-house dicom-to-nifti converter. In order to de-identify data, information on centre-specific study and participant codes have been removed using an automated procedure. All human participants were given sequential integer IDs.

Technical Validation

Motion artifacts

In line with Gedamu et al.[21], motion artifacts in the structural volumes were estimated by calculating the noise ratio between the phase encoding direction and read direction outside of the brain. Two ROIs of +/−1,225 mm2 was drawn in the sagittal plane; 5 mm lateral of the skull, and in the coronal plane; 5 mm anterior of the skull, in the magnitude image of the second inversion time of the MP2RAGE sequence and FLASH sequences. The sagittal ROI corresponds to the read direction for the MP2RAGE whole brain and phase encoding direction for the MP2RAGE and FLASH slab, whereas the coronal ROI corresponds to the phase encoding direction for the MP2RAGE whole brain and read direction for the MP2RAGE and FLASH slab. The mean signal was extracted from both ROI’s and the mean phase encoding direction signal was divided by the mean read direction signal. The closer this ratio is to 1, the less motion artifacts are present. Following Gedamu et al.[21], we estimated that any ratio below 2 reflects little to no motion artifacts (see Figure 2 for an example of the data quality).
Figure 2

An example of the data quality.

Two axial images of the three acquired datasets are displayed for a representative young subject. Only a few of the easily identifiable structures have been labeled. Note that not all structures are equally well visibly in the T1-weighted volumes compared to the T2*-weighted volume and argue for the need of multi sequence acquisition when interested in subcortical structures.

One sided t-tests were conducted to test whether any of the groups showed significant motion artifacts in any of the sequences. All ratios per sequence and age group were significantly lower than 2 (MP2RAGE whole-brain: young (t(29)=−17.93, P<0.001); middle-aged (t(13)=−5.44, P<0.001); elderly (t(8)=−7.19, P<0.001), MP2RAGE slab: young (t(29)=−35.06, P<0.001); middle-aged (t(13)=−23.43, P<0.001); elderly (t(8)=−13.33, P<0.001), FLASH echo 1: young (t(29)=−3.74, P<0.001); middle-aged (t(13)=−17.68, P<0.001); elderly (t(8)=−16.97, P<0.001), FLASH echo 2: young (t(29)=−6.88, P<0.001); middle-aged (t(13)=−14.88, P<0.001); elderly (t(8)=−6.31, P<0.001), FLASH echo 3: young (t(29)=−10.36, P<0.001); middle-aged (t(13)=−6.23, P<0.001); elderly (t(8)=−19.53, P<0.001); Table 5 (available online only)).
Table 5

Noise ratio between the phase encoding direction and read direction per participant

Age Group Participant ID MP2RAGE whole brain MP2RAGE slab FLASH echo 1 FLASH echo 2 FLASH echo 3
1pp011.791.221.451.842.02
pp021.250.851.271.561.50
pp031.340.950.931.101.12
pp041.461.131.191.802.05
pp052.330.651.311.922.13
pp061.101.071.842.292.57
pp071.601.061.592.462.98*
pp081.830.971.111.421.48
pp091.520.850.510.751.03
pp101.831.131.481.951.90
pp111.450.951.051.471.52
pp121.511.101.461.771.77
pp131.341.010.971.291.41
pp141.840.810.941.411.55
pp151.610.960.981.291.41
pp161.191.111.301.581.52
pp171.561.261.682.422.61
pp181.690.670.590.800.96
pp191.000.821.601.811.84
pp201.330.931.031.601.82
pp211.990.980.801.181.71
pp221.250.831.281.481.45
pp231.780.870.971.401.60
pp241.361.030.971.341.29
pp251.461.121.261.992.29
pp261.840.981.271.501.35
pp271.440.740.921.010.97
pp281.361.250.851.351.41
pp291.350.770.530.46* 0.45*
pp301.580.930.630.630.71
2pp311.461.010.821.371.80
pp321.211.22* 1.36* 1.902.01
pp331.110.990.680.610.56
pp340.981.010.881.201.35
pp351.911.071.36* 1.120.90
pp361.751.30* 0.590.600.59
pp371.361.040.841.011.10
pp381.221.030.871.221.32
pp392.231.090.660.620.65
pp401.341.000.710.680.60
pp411.180.60* 0.580.570.61
pp421.770.880.680.780.73
pp431.680.981.181.421.43
pp441.610.970.690.830.81
3pp451.100.961.101.131.16
pp461.810.810.811.091.15
pp471.621.390.991.100.98
pp481.161.351.231.74* 1.88*
pp491.190.861.000.840.70
pp501.531.040.690.810.90
pp511.401.161.171.060.88
pp521.360.840.600.790.89
pp530.971.000.810.840.84

*indicates participants displaying more noise than the rest of the age group based on the +/−1.5* interquartile range.

There was no main effect of age on motion for the MP2RAGE whole brain (F(2,50)=1.29, P=0.29) or MP2RAGE slab (F(2,50)=0.8, P=0.44). There was a main effect of age and echo time on motion for the FLASH sequence (age: F(2,147)=4.97, P=0.008, echo time: F(2,147)=10.45, P<0.001). Post-hoc testing showed that the young had significantly more motion artifacts than both the middle-aged and elderly (young versus middle-aged: t(103.18)=5.61, P<0.001, young versus elderly: t(79.03)=5.25, P<0.001) whereas the middle-aged and elderly did not differ significantly (t(65.73)=−0.59, P=1.0). Post-hoc testing showed that the first echo time had significantly less motion artifacts than both the second and third echo time (first echo versus second echo: t(90)=−3.29, P=0.003, first echo versus third echo: t(82.17)=−3.77, P=0.001) whereas the second and third echo time did not differ significantly (t(101.66)=−0.72, P=0.92). All post-hoc testing was Bonferroni corrected at an alpha of 0.05.

Signal to noise ratio

To estimate the Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR), the mean signal from an axial slice just above the corpus callosum was divided by the standard deviation of the signal in the read direction ROI both in the magnitude image of the second inversion time of the MP2RAGE sequence and FLASH sequences. To improve the estimation of noise a Rician correction was applied[22]. As this is still an approximation of the true SNR, the term SNRapprox. is used. For the three different sequences there was a main effect of age on SNRapprox. (MP2RAGE whole brain: F(2,50)=48.3, P<0.001; MP2RAGE slab: F(2,50)=5.94, P=0.005; FLASH: F(2,147)=6.90, P=0.001). Additionally there was a main effect of echo time on SNRapprox. (F(2,147)=11.75, P<0.001). Post-hoc testing showed that for the MP2RAGE whole brain, the young had a significantly higher SNRapprox than both the middle-aged and elderly (young versus middle-aged: t(33.72)=8.87, P<0.001; young versus elderly: t(18.37)=8.41, P<0.001) whereas the middle-aged and elderly did not differ significantly (t(17.61)=0.46, P=1.0). A similar pattern was found for the MP2RAGE slab. The young had a significantly higher SNRapprox than both the middle-aged and elderly (young versus middle-aged: t(24.8)=2.86, P=0.017; young versus elderly: t(17.46)=2.92, P=0.019) whereas the middle-aged and elderly did not differ significantly (t(20.56)=−0.10, P=1.0). The young had a significantly higher SNRapprox in the FLASH sequence than the middle-aged (t(70.80)=3.35, P=0.003) but did not differ from the elderly (t(36.31)=0.16, P=1.0). The middle-aged and elderly did not differ in SNRapprox for the FLASH sequence (t(51.87)=−2.16, P=0.071). Post-hoc testing showed that the first echo time had significantly more SNRapprox than both the second and third echo time (first echo versus second echo: t(97.2)=4.89, P<0.001, first echo versus third echo: t(88.4)=8.05, P<0.001). The second echo time had significantly higher SNRapprox than the third echo time (t(100.91)=3.42, P=0.002). All post-hoc testing was Bonferroni corrected at an alpha of 0.05 (Table 6 (available online only)).
Table 6

SNRapprox between the axial slab containing the brain and read direction per participant

Age Group Participant ID MP2RAGE whole brain MP2RAGE slab FLASH echo 1 FLASH echo 2 FLASH echo 3
1pp0174.0736.2628.3119.7413.88
pp0268.0432.9331.5525.2021.28
pp0371.6132.6543.9034.0428.94
pp0468.4138.5725.4717.8413.45
pp0568.7019.6221.7214.6310.79
pp0657.6137.6624.1116.2011.69
pp0769.4630.7214.3310.307.67
pp0872.9136.6333.0625.1720.39
pp0952.8721.0037.4827.8621.44
pp1067.0031.5724.5018.1514.61
pp1170.3137.4032.2825.5421.60
pp1271.8842.0428.7720.0115.65
pp1347.8333.4432.8522.2318.73
pp1463.2526.3625.5820.7217.19
pp1563.6428.7731.3620.0715.19
pp1667.8744.9735.2025.3419.96
pp1768.8837.5220.6315.2111.89
pp1845.7015.6636.4025.7520.38
pp1949.7728.3728.2918.9614.16
pp2052.6627.7922.4218.4315.62
pp2161.1121.1618.6714.5911.71
pp2267.6126.2831.5423.8920.69
pp2357.7525.5029.2120.3515.52
pp2472.2537.2934.1428.3925.00
pp2561.4830.4524.3016.1712.18
pp2668.4342.3633.8526.2123.52
pp2759.6822.9027.1119.0314.64
pp2872.4840.4033.4226.9222.39
pp2940.5924.1129.6519.5215.88
pp3070.2634.3132.3524.1317.07
2pp3142.7431.6218.9214.6012.21
pp3251.4735.6523.5817.3113.67
pp3337.9024.7631.5223.1120.73
pp3432.3123.4334.7824.2918.90
pp3553.7612.874.415.776.55
pp3643.2620.9813.6710.377.87
pp3744.8430.6541.0228.5421.25
pp3846.5028.1533.0524.6919.84
pp3929.2629.5419.7214.1411.75
pp4042.6133.5528.8421.3618.10
pp4140.7711.3915.0510.166.85
pp4242.0515.2614.5511.7010.59
pp4342.9719.5913.9310.578.30
pp4434.8825.0621.0214.5211.16
3pp4533.5030.3841.4634.8727.63
pp4635.7821.2833.0621.7017.80
pp4744.5431.9013.459.517.46
pp4835.1924.8020.8114.7411.96
pp4937.6829.3725.3919.9417.02
pp5039.5224.0832.3223.5518.50
pp5147.6116.9715.1812.6710.58
pp5252.9916.6537.1930.1523.64
pp5337.8627.3535.0024.5419.52
In addition to the SNRapprox. calculation and the noise ratio between the phase encoding direction and read direction, the scans were visually inspected by two independent researchers. The FLASH magnitude scans were checked for ghosting, wrapping, or shading artifacts. The MP2RAGE UNI scans were checked for ghosting, wrapping, shading, and the presence of ‘zebra stripe’ artifacts. Finally the MP2RAGE T1 scans were checked for ghosting, wrapping, shading, the presence of ‘zebra stripes’, and CSF clipping artifacts where ‘1’ corresponds to not present at all and ‘5’ corresponds to severely present. Ghosting artifacts are generally caused by motion and appear as a ‘ghost’ image of the brain in phase encoding direction. Wrapping artifacts are usually caused by anatomical features protruding outside of the imaged field of view but still within the sensitive volume of the RF coil. Shading artifacts were defined as a non-homogenous intensity throughout the entire brain. Zebra stripes were defined as well defined alternating black and white stripes present in the brain. Finally, CSF clipping artifacts were defined as the voxels in the CSF that have a signal dropout and appear black (McRobbie et al., 2006). The mean rating for each scale for each checked volume is given in Table 7 (available online only). Volumes that had a higher rating on that quality check than the rest of the age group based on the +/−1.5* interquartile range are highlighted with an asterisk.
Table 7

The mean artifact rating between two raters

Age group Flash
MP2RAGE Slab
MP2RAGE Brain
Subjects Ghosting Wrapping Shading Ghosting Wrapping Shading Zebra stripes Clipping Ghosting Wrapping Shading Zebra stripes Clipping
`1 pp01 111,511,531111311
pp02 11411,531111311
pp03 11211,52,51111313,5
pp04 113,511,52,511113,514
pp05 11211,52,51111312,5
pp06 113,511,541111,5314,5
pp07 113,511,541111313
pp08 11211,5411113,512,5
pp09 114,511,54,511113,513
pp10 122,511,54,51111414
pp11 11,5211,53,51111314
pp12 11211,54111,5*1312,5
pp13 112,511,52,51111312,5
pp14 1,5*1411,541111312,5
pp15 11,51,511,53,5111,5*1312,5
pp16 11211,53,5111,5*1312,5
pp17 113,511,53,5111133*4
pp18 14*2,511,54,51311312,5
pp19 113,511,5412113,511
pp20 1,5*1,54,511,541211,53,52,5*1,5
pp21 114,511,5411113,511
pp22 11211,53,51111314
pp23 12411,541211,5311
pp24 113,511,53,5121,5*13,511
pp25 12411,53,51211,5311
pp26 11411,541211314
pp27 11411,53,51211311
pp28 1,5*23,511,53,5121,5*1,533,5*1
pp29 12411,53,51211,5314
pp30 11411,53,51213*312
2 pp31 1,5*13,511,53,51111,5311
pp32 113,511,53,51111,53,52,5*4,5
pp33 113,511,53,512,511313
pp34 13,5*412*3,512,51,5*13,514
pp35 2,5*3*3,511,53,512,51,5*1314
pp36 2,5*2,5*3,511,53,512,5113,511
pp37 2,5*2,5*3,511,53,51111,5311
pp38 12,5*3,511,53,511113,511
pp39 113,511,53,511113,511
pp40 113,511,53,511113,511
pp41 1,5*2,5*411,5311113,511
pp42 2,5*13,511,53,51111,53,511
pp43 11413,5*3,512,511,5313
pp44 114,511,53,51111,53,512
3 pp45 11,5411,53,51111,5314,5
pp46 11,5411,5412,511,53,511
pp47 11411,53,51111,5311
pp48 11,5411,541111,5411
pp49 11,5411,53,512,5123,511
pp50 114,511,531111411
pp51 11,5411,5412,5113,511
pp52 1,5*1,54,511,53,51111,53,514,5
pp53 11411,53,512,51,5*1311
As a result of the scan parameters of the MP2RAGE sequence, a number of participants show T1 clipping artifacts in the T1 map located in the CSF. This is indicated in Table 7 (available online only). Note that these clipping artifacts do not affect the T1 values reported in the grey and white matter tissue.

Usage Notes

The procedures we employed in this study resulted in a dataset that is highly suitable for automated processing. Data are shared in documented standard formats, such as NIfTI or plain text files, to enable further processing in arbitrary analysis environments with no imposed dependencies on proprietary tools. All processing performed on the released data article were produced by open-source software on standard computer workstations.

Additional information

Tables 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 are only available in the online version of this paper. How to cite this article: Forstmann, B. U. et al. Multi-modal ultra-high resolution structural 7-Tesla MRI data repository. Sci. Data 1:140050 doi: 10.1038/sdata.2014.50 (2014).
  19 in total

Review 1.  Brain templates and atlases.

Authors:  Alan C Evans; Andrew L Janke; D Louis Collins; Sylvain Baillet
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2012-01-10       Impact factor: 6.556

2.  FLASH imaging: rapid NMR imaging using low flip-angle pulses. 1986.

Authors:  A Haase; J Frahm; D Matthaei; W Hänicke; K-D Merboldt
Journal:  J Magn Reson       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 2.229

3.  Automated quality control of brain MR images.

Authors:  Elias L Gedamu; D L Collins; Douglas L Arnold
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 4.813

4.  Toward discovery science of human brain function.

Authors:  Bharat B Biswal; Maarten Mennes; Xi-Nian Zuo; Suril Gohel; Clare Kelly; Steve M Smith; Christian F Beckmann; Jonathan S Adelstein; Randy L Buckner; Stan Colcombe; Anne-Marie Dogonowski; Monique Ernst; Damien Fair; Michelle Hampson; Matthew J Hoptman; James S Hyde; Vesa J Kiviniemi; Rolf Kötter; Shi-Jiang Li; Ching-Po Lin; Mark J Lowe; Clare Mackay; David J Madden; Kristoffer H Madsen; Daniel S Margulies; Helen S Mayberg; Katie McMahon; Christopher S Monk; Stewart H Mostofsky; Bonnie J Nagel; James J Pekar; Scott J Peltier; Steven E Petersen; Valentin Riedl; Serge A R B Rombouts; Bart Rypma; Bradley L Schlaggar; Sein Schmidt; Rachael D Seidler; Greg J Siegle; Christian Sorg; Gao-Jun Teng; Juha Veijola; Arno Villringer; Martin Walter; Lihong Wang; Xu-Chu Weng; Susan Whitfield-Gabrieli; Peter Williamson; Christian Windischberger; Yu-Feng Zang; Hong-Ying Zhang; F Xavier Castellanos; Michael P Milham
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2010-02-22       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  A high-resolution 7-Tesla fMRI dataset from complex natural stimulation with an audio movie.

Authors:  Michael Hanke; Florian J Baumgartner; Pierre Ibe; Falko R Kaule; Stefan Pollmann; Oliver Speck; Wolf Zinke; Jörg Stadler
Journal:  Sci Data       Date:  2014-05-27       Impact factor: 6.444

6.  A computational framework for ultra-high resolution cortical segmentation at 7Tesla.

Authors:  Pierre-Louis Bazin; Marcel Weiss; Juliane Dinse; Andreas Schäfer; Robert Trampel; Robert Turner
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2013-04-25       Impact factor: 6.556

7.  The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory.

Authors:  R C Oldfield
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  1971-03       Impact factor: 3.139

8.  MP2RAGE, a self bias-field corrected sequence for improved segmentation and T1-mapping at high field.

Authors:  José P Marques; Tobias Kober; Gunnar Krueger; Wietske van der Zwaag; Pierre-François Van de Moortele; Rolf Gruetter
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2009-10-09       Impact factor: 6.556

9.  Clinical fMRI: evidence for a 7T benefit over 3T.

Authors:  R Beisteiner; S Robinson; M Wurnig; M Hilbert; K Merksa; J Rath; I Höllinger; N Klinger; Ch Marosi; S Trattnig; A Geissler
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2011-05-17       Impact factor: 6.556

10.  A perspective on terra incognita: uncovering the neuroanatomy of the human subcortex.

Authors:  Anneke Alkemade; Max C Keuken; Birte U Forstmann
Journal:  Front Neuroanat       Date:  2013-12-03       Impact factor: 3.856

View more
  25 in total

Review 1.  Towards a mechanistic understanding of the human subcortex.

Authors:  Birte U Forstmann; Gilles de Hollander; Leendert van Maanen; Anneke Alkemade; Max C Keuken
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2016-12-15       Impact factor: 34.870

2.  Comparing functional MRI protocols for small, iron-rich basal ganglia nuclei such as the subthalamic nucleus at 7 T and 3 T.

Authors:  Gilles de Hollander; Max C Keuken; Wietske van der Zwaag; Birte U Forstmann; Robert Trampel
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2017-03-27       Impact factor: 5.038

3.  General methodology for inferring failure-spreading dynamics in networks.

Authors:  Xiangyang Guan; Cynthia Chen
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-08-15       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Multi-modal imaging with specialized sequences improves accuracy of the automated subcortical grey matter segmentation.

Authors:  Andrew J Plassard; Shunxing Bao; Pierre F D'Haese; Srivatsan Pallavaram; Daniel O Claassen; Benoit M Dawant; Bennett A Landman
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2019-05-21       Impact factor: 2.546

5.  Partial volume model for brain MRI scan using MP2RAGE.

Authors:  Quentin Duché; Hervé Saint-Jalmes; Oscar Acosta; Parnesh Raniga; Pierrick Bourgeat; Vincent Doré; Gary F Egan; Olivier Salvado
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2017-07-05       Impact factor: 5.038

6.  Lead-DBS v2: Towards a comprehensive pipeline for deep brain stimulation imaging.

Authors:  Andreas Horn; Ningfei Li; Till A Dembek; Ari Kappel; Chadwick Boulay; Siobhan Ewert; Anna Tietze; Andreas Husch; Thushara Perera; Wolf-Julian Neumann; Marco Reisert; Hang Si; Robert Oostenveld; Christopher Rorden; Fang-Cheng Yeh; Qianqian Fang; Todd M Herrington; Johannes Vorwerk; Andrea A Kühn
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2018-09-01       Impact factor: 6.556

Review 7.  Analysis strategies for high-resolution UHF-fMRI data.

Authors:  Jonathan R Polimeni; Ville Renvall; Natalia Zaretskaya; Bruce Fischl
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2017-04-29       Impact factor: 6.556

8.  The subthalamic nucleus during decision-making with multiple alternatives.

Authors:  Max C Keuken; Leendert Van Maanen; Rafal Bogacz; Andreas Schäfer; Jane Neumann; Robert Turner; Birte U Forstmann
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2015-07-15       Impact factor: 5.038

9.  The subcortical cocktail problem; mixed signals from the subthalamic nucleus and substantia nigra.

Authors:  Gilles de Hollander; Max C Keuken; Birte U Forstmann
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-03-20       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Highest Resolution In Vivo Human Brain MRI Using Prospective Motion Correction.

Authors:  Daniel Stucht; K Appu Danishad; Peter Schulze; Frank Godenschweger; Maxim Zaitsev; Oliver Speck
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-30       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.