Literature DB >> 29897342

Motion artifacts in standard clinical setting obscure disease-specific differences in quantitative susceptibility mapping.

J Meineke1, F Wenzel, M De Marco, A Venneri, D J Blackburn, K Teh, I D Wilkinson, U Katscher.   

Abstract

As quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) is maturing, more clinical applications are being explored. With this comes the question whether QSM is sufficiently robust and reproducible to be directly used in a clinical setting where patients are possibly not cooperative and/or unable to suppress involuntary movements sufficiently. Twenty-nine patients with Alzheimer's disease, 31 patients with mild cognitive impairment and 41 healthy controls were scanned on a 3 T scanner, including a multi-echo gradient-echo sequence for QSM and an inversion-prepared segmented gradient-echo sequence (T1-TFE, MPRAGE). The severity of motion artifacts (excessive/strong/noticeable/invisible) was categorized via visual inspection by two independent raters. Quantitative susceptibility was reconstructed using 'joint background-field removal and segmentation-enhanced dipole inversion', based on segmented subcortical gray-matter regions, as well as using 'morphology enabled dipole inversion'. Statistical analysis of the susceptibility maps was performed per region. A large fraction of the data showed motion artifacts, visible in both magnitude images and susceptibility maps. No statistically significant susceptibility differences were found between groups including motion-affected data. Considering only subjects without visible motion, significant susceptibility differences were observed in caudate nucleus as well as in putamen. Motion-effects can obscure statistically significant differences in QSM between patients and controls. Additional measures to restrict and/or compensate for subject motion should be taken for QSM in standard clinical settings to avoid risk of false findings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29897342     DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/aacc52

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   3.609


  4 in total

Review 1.  Early differentiation of neurodegenerative diseases using the novel QSM technique: what is the biomarker of each disorder?

Authors:  Farzaneh Nikparast; Zohreh Ganji; Hoda Zare
Journal:  BMC Neurosci       Date:  2022-07-28       Impact factor: 3.264

Review 2.  Brain pathological changes during neurodegenerative diseases and their identification methods: How does QSM perform in detecting this process?

Authors:  Farzaneh Nikparast; Zohreh Ganji; Mohammad Danesh Doust; Reyhane Faraji; Hoda Zare
Journal:  Insights Imaging       Date:  2022-04-13

Review 3.  Quantitative susceptibility mapping as an imaging biomarker for Alzheimer's disease: The expectations and limitations.

Authors:  Yuto Uchida; Hirohito Kan; Keita Sakurai; Kenichi Oishi; Noriyuki Matsukawa
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2022-08-05       Impact factor: 5.152

4.  European Ultrahigh-Field Imaging Network for Neurodegenerative Diseases (EUFIND).

Authors:  Emrah Düzel; Julio Acosta-Cabronero; David Berron; Geert Jan Biessels; Isabella Björkman-Burtscher; Michel Bottlaender; Richard Bowtell; Mark V Buchem; Arturo Cardenas-Blanco; Fawzi Boumezbeur; Dennis Chan; Stuart Clare; Mauro Costagli; Ludovic de Rochefort; Ariane Fillmer; Penny Gowland; Oskar Hansson; Jeroen Hendrikse; Oliver Kraff; Mark E Ladd; Itamar Ronen; Esben Petersen; James B Rowe; Hartwig Siebner; Tony Stoecker; Sina Straub; Michela Tosetti; Kamil Uludag; Alexandre Vignaud; Jaco Zwanenburg; Oliver Speck
Journal:  Alzheimers Dement (Amst)       Date:  2019-07-31
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.