V Chaplin1, M A Phipps1, S V Jonathan2, W A Grissom1,2, P F Yang1, L M Chen1, C F Caskey3,4. 1. Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Institute of Imaging Science, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, AA 1105 MCN, 1161 21st Ave. S, Nashville, TN, TN 37232, USA. 2. Biomedical Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA. 3. Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Institute of Imaging Science, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, AA 1105 MCN, 1161 21st Ave. S, Nashville, TN, TN 37232, USA. charles.f.caskey@vanderbilt.edu. 4. Biomedical Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA. charles.f.caskey@vanderbilt.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Transcranial focused ultrasound (FUS) is increasingly being explored to modulate neuronal activity. To target neuromodulation, researchers often localize the FUS beam onto the brain region(s) of interest using spatially tracked tools overlaid on pre-acquired images. Here, we quantify the accuracy of optically tracked image-guided FUS with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) thermometry, evaluate sources of error and demonstrate feasibility of these procedures to target the macaque somatosensory region. METHODS: We developed an optically tracked FUS system capable of projecting the transducer focus onto a pre-acquired MRI volume. To measure the target registration error (TRE), we aimed the transducer focus at a desired target in a phantom under image guidance, heated the target while imaging with MR thermometry and then calculated the TRE as the difference between the targeted and heated locations. Multiple targets were measured using either an unbiased or bias-corrected calibration. We then targeted the macaque S1 brain region, where displacement induced by the acoustic radiation force was measured using MR acoustic radiation force imaging (MR-ARFI). RESULTS: All calibration methods enabled registration with TRE on the order of 3 mm. Unbiased calibration resulted in an average TRE of 3.26 mm (min-max: 2.80-4.53 mm), which was not significantly changed by prospective bias correction (TRE of 3.05 mm; 2.06-3.81 mm, p = 0.55). Restricting motion between the transducer and target and increasing the distance between tracked markers reduced the TRE to 2.43 mm (min-max: 0.79-3.88 mm). MR-ARFI images showed qualitatively similar shape and extent as projected beam profiles in a living non-human primate. CONCLUSIONS: Our study describes methods for image guidance of FUS neuromodulation and quantifies errors associated with this method in a large animal. The workflow is efficient enough for in vivo use, and we demonstrate transcranial MR-ARFI in vivo in macaques for the first time.
PURPOSE: Transcranial focused ultrasound (FUS) is increasingly being explored to modulate neuronal activity. To target neuromodulation, researchers often localize the FUS beam onto the brain region(s) of interest using spatially tracked tools overlaid on pre-acquired images. Here, we quantify the accuracy of optically tracked image-guided FUS with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) thermometry, evaluate sources of error and demonstrate feasibility of these procedures to target the macaque somatosensory region. METHODS: We developed an optically tracked FUS system capable of projecting the transducer focus onto a pre-acquired MRI volume. To measure the target registration error (TRE), we aimed the transducer focus at a desired target in a phantom under image guidance, heated the target while imaging with MR thermometry and then calculated the TRE as the difference between the targeted and heated locations. Multiple targets were measured using either an unbiased or bias-corrected calibration. We then targeted the macaque S1 brain region, where displacement induced by the acoustic radiation force was measured using MR acoustic radiation force imaging (MR-ARFI). RESULTS: All calibration methods enabled registration with TRE on the order of 3 mm. Unbiased calibration resulted in an average TRE of 3.26 mm (min-max: 2.80-4.53 mm), which was not significantly changed by prospective bias correction (TRE of 3.05 mm; 2.06-3.81 mm, p = 0.55). Restricting motion between the transducer and target and increasing the distance between tracked markers reduced the TRE to 2.43 mm (min-max: 0.79-3.88 mm). MR-ARFI images showed qualitatively similar shape and extent as projected beam profiles in a living non-human primate. CONCLUSIONS: Our study describes methods for image guidance of FUS neuromodulation and quantifies errors associated with this method in a large animal. The workflow is efficient enough for in vivo use, and we demonstrate transcranial MR-ARFI in vivo in macaques for the first time.
Authors: Dan E Azagury; Monica M Dua; James C Barrese; Jaimie M Henderson; Nicolas C Buchs; Frederic Ris; Jordan M Cloyd; John B Martinie; Sharif Razzaque; Stéphane Nicolau; Luc Soler; Jacques Marescaux; Brendan C Visser Journal: Curr Probl Surg Date: 2015-10-22 Impact factor: 1.909
Authors: Douglas P Perrin; Nikolay V Vasilyev; Paul Novotny; Jeffrey Stoll; Robert D Howe; Pierre E Dupont; Ivan S Salgo; Pedro J del Nido Journal: Curr Probl Surg Date: 2009-09 Impact factor: 1.909
Authors: Shih-Ying Wu; Christian Aurup; Carlos Sierra Sanchez; Julien Grondin; Wenlan Zheng; Hermes Kamimura; Vincent P Ferrera; Elisa E Konofagou Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2018-05-22 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Pooja Gaur; Kerriann M Casey; Jan Kubanek; Ningrui Li; Morteza Mohammadjavadi; Yamil Saenz; Gary H Glover; Donna M Bouley; Kim Butts Pauly Journal: Brain Stimul Date: 2020-02-21 Impact factor: 8.955
Authors: M Anthony Phipps; Sumeeth V Jonathan; Pai-Feng Yang; Vandiver Chaplin; Li Min Chen; William A Grissom; Charles F Caskey Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-11-07 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Aparna Singh; Jiro Kusunose; M Anthony Phipps; Feng Wang; Li Min Chen; Charles F Caskey Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-08-30 Impact factor: 4.996