| Literature DB >> 29509681 |
Michał Staniszewski1, Agnieszka Skorupa2, Łukasz Boguszewicz3, Maria Sokół4, Andrzej Polański5.
Abstract
The quality of the magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) depends on the stability of magnetic resonance (MR) system performance and optimal hardware functioning, which ensure adequate levels of signal-to-noise ratios (SNR) as well as good spectral resolution and minimal artifacts in the spectral data. MRS quality control (QC) protocols and methodologies are based on phantom measurements that are repeated regularly. In this work, a signal partitioning algorithm based on a dynamic programming (DP) method for QC assessment of the spectral data is described. The proposed algorithm allows detection of the change points-the abrupt variations in the time series data. The proposed QC method was tested using the simulated and real phantom data. Simulated data were randomly generated time series distorted by white noise. The real data were taken from the phantom quality control studies of the MRS scanner collected for four and a half years and analyzed by LCModel software. Along with the proposed algorithm, performance of various literature methods was evaluated for the predefined number of change points based on the error values calculated by subtracting the mean values calculated for the periods between the change-points from the original data points. The time series were checked using external software, a set of external methods and the proposed tool, and the obtained results were comparable. The application of dynamic programming in the analysis of the phantom MRS data is a novel approach to QC. The obtained results confirm that the presented change-point-detection tool can be used either for independent analysis of MRS time series (or any other) or as a part of quality control.Entities:
Keywords: biomedical signal processing; change points detection; magnetic resonance spectroscopy; quality control; reproducibility
Year: 2018 PMID: 29509681 PMCID: PMC5877107 DOI: 10.3390/s18030792
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Various scoring functions for our implementation of dynamic programming (DP), where denotes a standard deviation, is a mean value and n is a number of points in segment.
| DP1 | DP2 (2) | DP3 | DP4 |
| DP5 | DP6 | DP7 | |
Figure 1The main window of the time series analysis tool for quality control showing the change points and the statistics results obtained for exemplary data. The color bands correspond to the mean values (± standard deviation) of the signal in the monitored time intervals. The table in the lower-left corner presents: change points (ch_pt), medians, lower and upper confidence intervals (down and up), magnitude of the signal change (from/to) expressed as the mean signals in the time intervals before and after the change point, the correction factor computed as: (mean signal in the time interval after the change point/mean signal in the first interval) × 100%, mean signal in the time period before the change point.
Figure 2Results of the analysis of random time series using our online quality control (QC) tool: (a) marked mean values in the intervals between change-points and residuals computed as differences between original data points and means in the corresponding time intervals; (b) relation between the error (computed using Equation (4)) and the number of change points obtained using various methods.
Figure 3Temporal variability of the water scaled N-acetylaspartate (NAAws) and NAATRA,REC values obtained from short TE 1H-MRS spectra (TE 35 ms): (a) scatterplot; (b) boxplot.
Figure 4Time series analysis of the NAATRA,REC levels obtained from the short (blue) and long (red) TE 1H-MRS spectra: (a) visualization of the change points and corresponding confidence intervals (CI); (b) the relation between the error values (computed using Equation (4)) and the change points numbers obtained using various methods for short TE.
Mean values (mean) and standard deviation (std) of full width at half maximum (FWHM), signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and transmitter gain (TG) of the spectra averaged for the time intervals detected by the change point analysis. FWHM and SNR (the ratio of the maximum in the spectrum-minus baseline over the analysis window to twice the root mean squares of residuals) are the main spectral quality parameters determined with use of Linear Combination Model (LCModel) [24].
| From 3/4/2006 to 19/10/2006 | From 31/10/2006 to 30/10/2007 | From 5/12/2007 to 19/12/2008 | From 20/12/2008 to 10/12/2009 | From 22/12/2009 to 2/2/2010 | From 24/2/2010 to 22/6/2010 | From 6/7/2010 to 21/9/2010 | Whole Time Interval | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Change point position | 13 | 41 | 75 | 88 | 95 | 100 | ||
| FWHM [ppm] mean + std | 0.0207 | 0.0208 | 0.0216 | 0.0213 | 0.0233 | 0.027 | 0.0219 | 0.0216 |
| SNR mean + std | 33.8333 | 32.9286 | 31.5 | 32.0769 | 32.8571 | 25 | 34 | 32.1604 |
| TG [0.1 dB] mean + std | 144.25 | 141.8214 | 141.2058 | 140.9231 | 139.8571 | 142.286 | 142.2857 | 141.604 |
The error values (computed using Equation (4)) obtained from the NAATRA,REC levels series analysis for a predefined number of six change points. The time points correspond to the following dates of the measurements: 13—19 October 2006, 41—30 October 2007, 75—19 December 2008, 88—10 December 2009, 95—2 February 2010, 100—22 June 2010.
| DP | CV | LOO | PML | wvarchg | CPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Error for NAA obtained from LCModel for 6 change points | |||||
| 0.0330 | 0.0330 | 0.0330 | 0.0347 | 0.0435 | 0.0344 |
| Position of detected change points | |||||
| 13; 41; 75; 88; 95; 100 | 13; 41; 75; 88; 95; 100 | 13; 41; 75; 88; 95; 100 | 41; 75; 78; 80; 88; 100 | 49; 50; 51; 94; 99; 100 | 12; 41; 60; 75; 88; 100 |