Literature DB >> 26606457

Sparse Reconstruction Challenge for diffusion MRI: Validation on a physical phantom to determine which acquisition scheme and analysis method to use?

Lipeng Ning1, Frederik Laun2, Yaniv Gur3, Edward V R DiBella4, Samuel Deslauriers-Gauthier5, Thinhinane Megherbi6, Aurobrata Ghosh7, Mauro Zucchelli8, Gloria Menegaz8, Rutger Fick7, Samuel St-Jean9, Michael Paquette9, Ramon Aranda10, Maxime Descoteaux9, Rachid Deriche7, Lauren O'Donnell11, Yogesh Rathi11.   

Abstract

Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging (dMRI) is the modality of choice for investigating in-vivo white matter connectivity and neural tissue architecture of the brain. The diffusion-weighted signal in dMRI reflects the diffusivity of water molecules in brain tissue and can be utilized to produce image-based biomarkers for clinical research. Due to the constraints on scanning time, a limited number of measurements can be acquired within a clinically feasible scan time. In order to reconstruct the dMRI signal from a discrete set of measurements, a large number of algorithms have been proposed in recent years in conjunction with varying sampling schemes, i.e., with varying b-values and gradient directions. Thus, it is imperative to compare the performance of these reconstruction methods on a single data set to provide appropriate guidelines to neuroscientists on making an informed decision while designing their acquisition protocols. For this purpose, the SPArse Reconstruction Challenge (SPARC) was held along with the workshop on Computational Diffusion MRI (at MICCAI 2014) to validate the performance of multiple reconstruction methods using data acquired from a physical phantom. A total of 16 reconstruction algorithms (9 teams) participated in this community challenge. The goal was to reconstruct single b-value and/or multiple b-value data from a sparse set of measurements. In particular, the aim was to determine an appropriate acquisition protocol (in terms of the number of measurements, b-values) and the analysis method to use for a neuroimaging study. The challenge did not delve on the accuracy of these methods in estimating model specific measures such as fractional anisotropy (FA) or mean diffusivity, but on the accuracy of these methods to fit the data. This paper presents several quantitative results pertaining to each reconstruction algorithm. The conclusions in this paper provide a valuable guideline for choosing a suitable algorithm and the corresponding data-sampling scheme for clinical neuroscience applications.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Angular error; Diffusion MRI; Normalized mean square error; Physical phantom

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26606457      PMCID: PMC4679726          DOI: 10.1016/j.media.2015.10.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Image Anal        ISSN: 1361-8415            Impact factor:   8.545


  44 in total

1.  High angular resolution diffusion imaging reveals intravoxel white matter fiber heterogeneity.

Authors:  David S Tuch; Timothy G Reese; Mette R Wiegell; Nikos Makris; John W Belliveau; Van J Wedeen
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 4.668

2.  The effect of gradient sampling schemes on measures derived from diffusion tensor MRI: a Monte Carlo study.

Authors:  Derek K Jones
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 4.668

Review 3.  Advances in functional and structural MR image analysis and implementation as FSL.

Authors:  Stephen M Smith; Mark Jenkinson; Mark W Woolrich; Christian F Beckmann; Timothy E J Behrens; Heidi Johansen-Berg; Peter R Bannister; Marilena De Luca; Ivana Drobnjak; David E Flitney; Rami K Niazy; James Saunders; John Vickers; Yongyue Zhang; Nicola De Stefano; J Michael Brady; Paul M Matthews
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 6.556

4.  A unified computational framework for deconvolution to reconstruct multiple fibers from diffusion weighted MRI.

Authors:  Bing Jian; Baba C Vemuri
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 10.048

5.  Novel spherical phantoms for Q-ball imaging under in vivo conditions.

Authors:  Amir Moussavi-Biugui; Bram Stieltjes; Klaus Fritzsche; Wolfhard Semmler; Frederik B Laun
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 4.668

6.  Sparse multi-shell diffusion imaging.

Authors:  Yogesh Rathi; O Michailovich; K Setsompop; S Bouix; M E Shenton; C F Westin
Journal:  Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv       Date:  2011

7.  White matter structure assessment from reduced HARDI data using low-rank polynomial approximations.

Authors:  Yaniv Gur; Fangxiang Jiao; Stella Xinghua Zhu; Chris R Johnson
Journal:  Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv       Date:  2012-10

8.  Mean apparent propagator (MAP) MRI: a novel diffusion imaging method for mapping tissue microstructure.

Authors:  Evren Özarslan; Cheng Guan Koay; Timothy M Shepherd; Michal E Komlosh; M Okan İrfanoğlu; Carlo Pierpaoli; Peter J Basser
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2013-04-13       Impact factor: 6.556

9.  Continuous diffusion signal, EAP and ODF estimation via Compressive Sensing in diffusion MRI.

Authors:  Sylvain L Merlet; Rachid Deriche
Journal:  Med Image Anal       Date:  2013-03-20       Impact factor: 8.545

10.  Dipy, a library for the analysis of diffusion MRI data.

Authors:  Eleftherios Garyfallidis; Matthew Brett; Bagrat Amirbekian; Ariel Rokem; Stefan van der Walt; Maxime Descoteaux; Ian Nimmo-Smith
Journal:  Front Neuroinform       Date:  2014-02-21       Impact factor: 4.081

View more
  28 in total

Review 1.  Challenges in diffusion MRI tractography - Lessons learned from international benchmark competitions.

Authors:  Kurt G Schilling; Alessandro Daducci; Klaus Maier-Hein; Cyril Poupon; Jean-Christophe Houde; Vishwesh Nath; Adam W Anderson; Bennett A Landman; Maxime Descoteaux
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2018-11-29       Impact factor: 2.546

2.  Multifold Acceleration of Diffusion MRI via Deep Learning Reconstruction from Slice-Undersampled Data.

Authors:  Yoonmi Hong; Geng Chen; Pew-Thian Yap; Dinggang Shen
Journal:  Inf Process Med Imaging       Date:  2019-05-22

3.  Tractography reproducibility challenge with empirical data (TraCED): The 2017 ISMRM diffusion study group challenge.

Authors:  Vishwesh Nath; Kurt G Schilling; Prasanna Parvathaneni; Yuankai Huo; Justin A Blaber; Allison E Hainline; Muhamed Barakovic; David Romascano; Jonathan Rafael-Patino; Matteo Frigo; Gabriel Girard; Jean-Philippe Thiran; Alessandro Daducci; Matt Rowe; Paulo Rodrigues; Vesna Prčkovska; Dogu B Aydogan; Wei Sun; Yonggang Shi; William A Parker; Abdol A Ould Ismail; Ragini Verma; Ryan P Cabeen; Arthur W Toga; Allen T Newton; Jakob Wasserthal; Peter Neher; Klaus Maier-Hein; Giovanni Savini; Fulvia Palesi; Enrico Kaden; Ye Wu; Jianzhong He; Yuanjing Feng; Michael Paquette; Francois Rheault; Jasmeen Sidhu; Catherine Lebel; Alexander Leemans; Maxime Descoteaux; Tim B Dyrby; Hakmook Kang; Bennett A Landman
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2019-06-09       Impact factor: 4.813

4.  An anatomically curated fiber clustering white matter atlas for consistent white matter tract parcellation across the lifespan.

Authors:  Fan Zhang; Ye Wu; Isaiah Norton; Laura Rigolo; Yogesh Rathi; Nikos Makris; Lauren J O'Donnell
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2018-06-18       Impact factor: 6.556

Review 5.  Advances in computational and statistical diffusion MRI.

Authors:  Lauren J O'Donnell; Alessandro Daducci; Demian Wassermann; Christophe Lenglet
Journal:  NMR Biomed       Date:  2017-11-14       Impact factor: 4.044

6.  Limits to anatomical accuracy of diffusion tractography using modern approaches.

Authors:  Kurt G Schilling; Vishwesh Nath; Colin Hansen; Prasanna Parvathaneni; Justin Blaber; Yurui Gao; Peter Neher; Dogu Baran Aydogan; Yonggang Shi; Mario Ocampo-Pineda; Simona Schiavi; Alessandro Daducci; Gabriel Girard; Muhamed Barakovic; Jonathan Rafael-Patino; David Romascano; Gaëtan Rensonnet; Marco Pizzolato; Alice Bates; Elda Fischi; Jean-Philippe Thiran; Erick J Canales-Rodríguez; Chao Huang; Hongtu Zhu; Liming Zhong; Ryan Cabeen; Arthur W Toga; Francois Rheault; Guillaume Theaud; Jean-Christophe Houde; Jasmeen Sidhu; Maxime Chamberland; Carl-Fredrik Westin; Tim B Dyrby; Ragini Verma; Yogesh Rathi; M Okan Irfanoglu; Cibu Thomas; Carlo Pierpaoli; Maxime Descoteaux; Adam W Anderson; Bennett A Landman
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2018-10-11       Impact factor: 6.556

7.  A theoretical signal processing framework for linear diffusion MRI: Implications for parameter estimation and experiment design.

Authors:  Divya Varadarajan; Justin P Haldar
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2017-08-19       Impact factor: 6.556

8.  Empirical consideration of the effects of acquisition parameters and analysis model on clinically feasible q-ball imaging.

Authors:  Kurt G Schilling; Vishwesh Nath; Justin A Blaber; Prasanna Parvathaneni; Adam W Anderson; Bennett A Landman
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2017-04-24       Impact factor: 2.546

9.  Test-retest reliability and long-term stability of three-tissue constrained spherical deconvolution methods for analyzing diffusion MRI data.

Authors:  Benjamin T Newman; Thijs Dhollander; Kristen A Reynier; Matthew B Panzer; T Jason Druzgal
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2020-02-28       Impact factor: 4.668

10.  Dictionary-based fiber orientation estimation with improved spatial consistency.

Authors:  Chuyang Ye; Jerry L Prince
Journal:  Med Image Anal       Date:  2017-11-23       Impact factor: 8.545

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.