PURPOSE: Optical prospective motion correction substantially reduces sensitivity to motion in neuroimaging of human subjects. However, a major barrier to clinical deployment has been the time-consuming cross-calibration between the camera and MRI scanner reference frames. This work addresses this challenge. METHODS: A single camera was mounted onto the head coil for tracking head motion. Two new methods were developed: (1) a rapid calibration method for camera-to-scanner cross-calibration using a custom-made tool incorporating wireless active markers, and (2) a calibration adjustment method to compensate for table motion between scans. Both methods were tested at 1.5T and 3T in vivo. Simulations were performed to determine the required mechanical tolerance for repositioning of the camera. RESULTS: The rapid calibration method is completed in a short (<30 s) scan, which is carried out only once per installation. The calibration adjustment method requires no extra scan time and runs automatically whenever the system is used. The mechanical tolerance analysis indicates that most motion (90% reduction in voxel displacement) could be corrected even with far larger camera repositioning errors than are observed in practice. CONCLUSION: The methods presented here allow calibration of sufficient quality to be carried out and maintained with no additional technologist workload. Magn Reson Med 79:1911-1921, 2018.
PURPOSE: Optical prospective motion correction substantially reduces sensitivity to motion in neuroimaging of human subjects. However, a major barrier to clinical deployment has been the time-consuming cross-calibration between the camera and MRI scanner reference frames. This work addresses this challenge. METHODS: A single camera was mounted onto the head coil for tracking head motion. Two new methods were developed: (1) a rapid calibration method for camera-to-scanner cross-calibration using a custom-made tool incorporating wireless active markers, and (2) a calibration adjustment method to compensate for table motion between scans. Both methods were tested at 1.5T and 3T in vivo. Simulations were performed to determine the required mechanical tolerance for repositioning of the camera. RESULTS: The rapid calibration method is completed in a short (<30 s) scan, which is carried out only once per installation. The calibration adjustment method requires no extra scan time and runs automatically whenever the system is used. The mechanical tolerance analysis indicates that most motion (90% reduction in voxel displacement) could be corrected even with far larger camera repositioning errors than are observed in practice. CONCLUSION: The methods presented here allow calibration of sufficient quality to be carried out and maintained with no additional technologist workload. Magn Reson Med 79:1911-1921, 2018.
Authors: Jalal B Andre; Brian W Bresnahan; Mahmud Mossa-Basha; Michael N Hoff; C Patrick Smith; Yoshimi Anzai; Wendy A Cohen Journal: J Am Coll Radiol Date: 2015-05-09 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: Murat Aksoy; Christoph Forman; Matus Straka; Stefan Skare; Samantha Holdsworth; Joachim Hornegger; Roland Bammer Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2011-03-22 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Benjamin Zahneisen; Chris Lovell-Smith; Michael Herbst; Maxim Zaitsev; Oliver Speck; Brian Armstrong; Thomas Ernst Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2013-06-20 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Julian Maclaren; Brian S R Armstrong; Robert T Barrows; K A Danishad; Thomas Ernst; Colin L Foster; Kazim Gumus; Michael Herbst; Ilja Y Kadashevich; Todd P Kusik; Qiaotian Li; Cris Lovell-Smith; Thomas Prieto; Peter Schulze; Oliver Speck; Daniel Stucht; Maxim Zaitsev Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-11-07 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Phillip DiGiacomo; Julian Maclaren; Murat Aksoy; Elizabeth Tong; Mackenzie Carlson; Bryan Lanzman; Syed Hashmi; Ronald Watkins; Jarrett Rosenberg; Brian Burns; Timothy W Skloss; Dan Rettmann; Brian Rutt; Roland Bammer; Michael Zeineh Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2020-02-20 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Matthew G Spangler-Bickell; Mohammad Mehdi Khalighi; Charlotte Hoo; Phillip Scott DiGiacomo; Julian Maclaren; Murat Aksoy; Dan Rettmann; Roland Bammer; Greg Zaharchuk; Michael Zeineh; Floris Jansen Journal: IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci Date: 2018-10-31
Authors: Robert Frost; Paul Wighton; F Işık Karahanoğlu; Richard L Robertson; P Ellen Grant; Bruce Fischl; M Dylan Tisdall; André van der Kouwe Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2019-02-28 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Kevin T Chen; Enhao Gong; Fabiola Bezerra de Carvalho Macruz; Junshen Xu; Athanasia Boumis; Mehdi Khalighi; Kathleen L Poston; Sharon J Sha; Michael D Greicius; Elizabeth Mormino; John M Pauly; Shyam Srinivas; Greg Zaharchuk Journal: Radiology Date: 2018-12-11 Impact factor: 29.146
Authors: Johan Berglund; Adam van Niekerk; Henric Rydén; Tim Sprenger; Enrico Avventi; Ola Norbeck; Stefan L Glimberg; Oline V Olesen; Stefan Skare Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2020-09-29 Impact factor: 4.668