Download PDF
Methods Inf Med 2015; 54(02): 171-178
DOI: 10.3414/ME14-01-0049
Original Articles
Schattauer GmbH

Influence of Parameter Settings in Voxel-based Morphometry 8

Using DARTEL and Region-of-interest on Reproducibility in Gray Matter Volumetry
M. Goto
1   Department of Radiological Technology, University of Tokyo Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
,
O. Abe
2   Department of Radiology, Nihon University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
,
S. Aoki
3   Department of Radiology, Juntendo University, Tokyo, Japan
,
N. Hayashi
4   Department of Computational Diagnostic Radiology and Preventive Medicine, University of Tokyo Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
,
T. Miyati
5   Graduate School of Medical Science, Kanazawa University, Kanazawa, Japan
,
H. Takao
6   Department of Radiology, University of Tokyo Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
,
H. Matsuda
7   Department of Nuclear Medicine, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Saitama, Japan
,
F. Yamashita
8   Department of Radiology, National Center Hospital of Neurology and Psychiatry, Japan
,
T. Iwatsubo
9   Department of Neuropathology, University of Tokyo Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
,
H. Mori
6   Department of Radiology, University of Tokyo Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
,
A. Kunimatsu
6   Department of Radiology, University of Tokyo Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
,
K. Ino
1   Department of Radiological Technology, University of Tokyo Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
,
K. Yano
1   Department of Radiological Technology, University of Tokyo Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
,
K. Ohtomo
6   Department of Radiology, University of Tokyo Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
,
for Japanese Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative › Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

received: 30 April 2014

accepted: 17 September 2014

Publication Date:
22 January 2018 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Summary

Objectives: To investigate whether reproducibility of gray matter volumetry is influenced by parameter settings for VBM 8 using Diffeomorphic Anatomical Registration Through Exponentiated Lie Algebra (DARTEL) with region-of-interest (ROI) analyses.

Methods: We prepared three-dimensional T1-weighted magnetic resonance images (3D-T1WIs) of 21 healthy subjects. All subjects were imaged with each of five MRI systems. Voxel-based morphometry 8 (VBM 8) and WFU PickAtlas software were used for gray matter volumetry. The bilateral ROI labels used were those provided as default settings with the software: Frontal Lobe, Hippocampus, Occipital Lobe, Orbital Gyrus, Parietal Lobe, Putamen, and Temporal Lobe. All 3D-T1WIs were segmented to gray matter with six parameters of VBM 8, with each parameter having between three and eight selectable levels. Reproducibility was evaluated as the standard deviation (mm3) of measured values for the five MRI systems.

Results: Reproducibility was influenced by ‘Bias regularization (BiasR)’, ‘Bias FWHM’, and ‘De-noising filter’ settings, but not by ‘MRF weighting’, ‘Sampling distance’, or ‘Warping regularization’ settings. Reproducibility in BiasR was influenced by ROI. Superior reproducibility was observed in Frontal Lobe with the BiasR1 setting, and in Hippocampus, Parietal Lobe, and Putamen with the BiasR3*, BiasR1, and BiasR5 settings, respectively.

Conclusion: Reproducibility of gray matter volumetry was influenced by parameter settings in VBM 8 using DARTEL and ROI. In multi-center studies, the use of appropriate settings in VBM 8 with DARTEL results in reduced scanner effect.

Keywords

Atlas-based method - gray matter volumetry - effect of scanner - reproducibility - statistical parametric mapping
 

  • References

  • 1 Maldjian JA, Laurienti PJ, Kraft RA, Burdette JH. An automated method for neuroanatomic and cytoarchitectonic atlas-based interrogation of fMRI data sets. Neuroimage 2003; 19: 1233-1239.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Gonoi W, Abe O, Yamasue H, Yamada H, Masutani Y, Takao H. et al. Age-related changes in regional brain volume evaluated by atlas-based method. Neuroradiology 2009; 52: 865-873.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Ashburner J, Friston KJ. Voxel-based morphometry - the methods. Neuroimage 2000; 11: 805-821.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Good CD, Johnsrude I, Ashburner J, Henson RN, Friston KJ, Frackowiak RS. Cerebral asymmetry and the effects of sex and handedness on brain structure: A voxel-based morphometric analyses of 465 normal adult human brains. Neuroimage 2001; 14: 685-700.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Nunnemann S, Wohlschlager AM, Ilg R, Gaser C, Etgen T, Conrad B. et al. Accelerated aging of the putamen in men but not in women. Neurobiol Aging 2009; 30: 147-151.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Sato K, Taki Y, Fukuda H, Kawashima R. Neuroanatomical database of normal Japanese brains. Neural Netw 2003; 16: 1301-1310.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Draganski B, Gaser C, Busch V, Schuierer G, Bogdahn U, May A. Neuroplasticity: Changes in grey matter induced by training. Nature 2004; 427: 311-312.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Baron JC, Chetelat G, Desgranges B, Perchey G, Landeau B, de la Sayette V. et al. In vivo mapping of gray matter loss with voxel-based morphometry in mild Alzheimer’s disease. Neuroimage 2001; 14: 298-309.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Keller SS, Roberts N. Voxel-based morphometry of temporal lobe epilepsy: An introduction and review of the literature. Epilepsia 2008; 49: 741-757.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Musen G, Lyoo IK, Sparks CR, Weinger K, Hwang J, Ryan CM. et al. Effects of type 1 diabetes on gray matter density as measured by voxel-based morphometry. Diabetes 2006; 55: 326-333.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Hayano F, Nakamura M, Asami T, Uehara K, Yoshida T, Roppongi T. et al. Smaller amygdala is associated with anxiety in patients with panic disorder. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 2009; 63: 266-276.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Ashburner J, Friston KJ. Unified segmentation. Neuroimage 2005; 26: 839-851.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Ashburner J. A fast diffeomorphic image registration algorithm. Neuroimage 2007; 38: 95-113.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Takahashi R, Ishii K, Miyamoto N, Yoshikawa T, Shimada K, Ohkawa S. et al. Measurement of gray and white matter atrophy in dementia with Lewy bodies using diffeomorphic anatomic registration through exponentiated lie algebra: A comparison with conventional voxel-based morphometry. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2010; 31: 1873-1878.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Cuingnet R, Gerardin E, Tessieras J, Auzias G, Lehericy S, Habert MO. et al. Automatic classification of patients with Alzheimer’s disease from structural MRI: A comparison of ten methods using the adni database. Neuroimage 2011; 56: 766-781.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Peelle JE, Cusack R, Henson RN. Adjusting for global effects in voxel-based morphometry: Gray matter decline in normal aging. Neuroimage 2012; 60: 1503-1516.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Sled JG, Zijdenbos AP, Evans AC. A nonparametric method for automatic correction of intensity nonuniformity in MRI data. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1998; 17: 87-97.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Goto M, Abe O, Miyati T, Kabasawa H, Takao H, Hayashi N. et al. Influence of signal intensity non-uniformity on brain volumetry using an atlas-based method. Korean J Radiol 2012; 13: 391-402.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Shuter B, Yeh IB, Graham S, Au C, Wang SC. Reproducibility of brain tissue volumes in longitudinal studies: Effects of changes in signal-to-noise ratio and scanner software. Neuroimage 2008; 41: 371-379.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Goto M, Abe O, Kabasawa H, Takao H, Miyati T, Hayashi N. et al. Effects of image distortion correction on voxel-based morphometry. Magn Reson Med Sci 2012; 11: 27-34.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Tzourio-Mazoyer N, Landeau B, Papathanassiou D, Crivello F, Etard O, Delcroix N. et al. Automated anatomical labeling of activations in SPM using a macroscopic anatomical parcellation of the MNI MRI single-subject brain. Neuroimage 2002; 15: 273-289.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Zheng W, Chee MW, Zagorodnov V. Improvement of brain segmentation accuracy by optimizing non-uniformity correction using N3. Neuroimage 2009; 48: 73-83.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Bernstein MA, Huston , 3rd J, Ward HA. Imaging artifacts at 3.0T. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 24: 735-746.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Rojas R, Rodriguez AO. Numerical study of the SNR and SAR of MRI coil arrays. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2007; 1196-1199.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Simmons A, Tofts PS, Barker GJ, Arridge SR. Sources of intensity nonuniformity in spin echo images at 1.5 T. Magn Reson Med 1994; 32: 121-128.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Doran SJ, Charles-Edwards L, Reinsberg SA, Leach MO. A complete distortion correction for MR images: I. Gradient warp correction. Phys Med Biol 2005; 50: 1343-1361.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Janke A, Zhao H, Cowin GJ, Galloway GJ, Doddrell DM. Use of spherical harmonic deconvolution methods to compensate for nonlinear gradient effects on MRI images. Magn Reson Med 2004; 52: 115-122.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Jovicich J, Czanner S, Greve D, Haley E, van der Kouwe A, Gollub R. et al. Reliability in multi-site structural MRI studies: Effects of gradient non-linearity correction on phantom and human data. Neuroimage 2006; 30: 436-443.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar