Impact of Scanner Hardware and Imaging Protocol on Image Quality and Compartment Volume Precision in the ADNI Cohort

Overview

Journal Neuroimage

Specialty Radiology

Date 2009 Nov 17

PMID 19913626

Citations 71

Authors

Frithjof Kruggel

Jessica Turner

L Tugan Muftuler

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Morphometry of brain structures based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data has become an important tool in neurobiology. Recent multicenter studies in neurodegenerative diseases raised the issue of the precision of volumetric measures, and their dependence on the scanner properties and imaging protocol. A large dataset consisting of 1073 MRI examinations in 843 subjects, acquired on 90 scanners at 58 sites, is analyzed here. A comprehensive set of image quality and content measures is used to describe the influence of the scanner hardware and imaging protocol on the variability of morphometric measures. Scanners equipped with array coils show a remarkable advantage over conventional coils in terms of image quality measures. The signal- and contrast-to-noise ratio in similar systems is equal or slightly better at 1.5 T than 3.0 T, while the white/grey matter tissue contrast is generally better on high-field systems. Repeated MRI investigations on the same scanner were available in 41 subjects, on different scanners in 172 subjects. The retest reliability of repeated volumetric measures under the same conditions was found as sufficient to track changes in longitudinal examinations in individual subjects. Using different acquisition conditions in the same subject, however, the variance of volumetric measures was up to 10 times greater. Two likely factors explaining this finding are scanner-dependent geometrical inaccuracies and differences in the white/grey matter tissue contrast.

Citing Articles

Visual rating of brain atrophy in structural MRI: Is its time over?.

Buchert R Eur Radiol. 2025; .

PMID: 39920304 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-025-11424-4.

A generalist model for enhancing brain MRIs.

Balbastre Y, Fischl B Nat Biomed Eng. 2025; .

PMID: 39856411 DOI: 10.1038/s41551-024-01320-5.

Cross-modality image translation of 3 Tesla Magnetic Resonance Imaging to 7 Tesla using Generative Adversarial Networks.

Diniz E, Santini T, Helmet K, Aizenstein H, Ibrahim T medRxiv. 2024; .

PMID: 39484249 PMC: 11527090. DOI: 10.1101/2024.10.16.24315609.

Neuropsychiatric symptoms: Risk factor or disease marker? A study of structural imaging biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease and incident cognitive decline.

Guan D, Rehman T, Nathan S, Durrani R, Potvin O, Duchesne S Hum Brain Mapp. 2024; 45(13):e70016.

PMID: 39254167 PMC: 11386326. DOI: 10.1002/hbm.70016.

nnSegNeXt: A 3D Convolutional Network for Brain Tissue Segmentation Based on Quality Evaluation.

Liu Y, Song C, Ning X, Gao Y, Wang D Bioengineering (Basel). 2024; 11(6).

PMID: 38927811 PMC: 11200537. DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering11060575.

References

Hua X, Leow A, Parikshak N, Lee S, Chiang M, Toga A . Tensor-based morphometry as a neuroimaging biomarker for Alzheimer's disease: an MRI study of 676 AD, MCI, and normal subjects. Neuroimage. 2008; 43(3):458-69. PMC: 3197851. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.07.013. View

Ewers M, Teipel S, Dietrich O, Schonberg S, Jessen F, Heun R . Multicenter assessment of reliability of cranial MRI. Neurobiol Aging. 2005; 27(8):1051-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2005.05.032. View

Turner J, Smyth P, Macciardi F, Fallon J, Kennedy J, Potkin S . Imaging phenotypes and genotypes in schizophrenia. Neuroinformatics. 2006; 4(1):21-49. DOI: 10.1385/NI:4:1:21. View

Jack Jr C, Shiung M, Weigand S, OBrien P, Gunter J, Boeve B . Brain atrophy rates predict subsequent clinical conversion in normal elderly and amnestic MCI. Neurology. 2005; 65(8):1227-31. PMC: 2753547. DOI: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000180958.22678.91. View

Jack Jr C, Bernstein M, Fox N, Thompson P, Alexander G, Harvey D . The Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI): MRI methods. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008; 27(4):685-91. PMC: 2544629. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.21049. View

Gudbjartsson H, Patz S . The Rician distribution of noisy MRI data. Magn Reson Med. 1995; 34(6):910-4. PMC: 2254141. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.1910340618. View

Schnack H, van Haren N, Hulshoff Pol H, Picchioni M, Weisbrod M, Sauer H . Reliability of brain volumes from multicenter MRI acquisition: a calibration study. Hum Brain Mapp. 2004; 22(4):312-20. PMC: 6872009. DOI: 10.1002/hbm.20040. View

Hua X, Leow A, Lee S, Klunder A, Toga A, Lepore N . 3D characterization of brain atrophy in Alzheimer's disease and mild cognitive impairment using tensor-based morphometry. Neuroimage. 2008; 41(1):19-34. PMC: 2556222. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.02.010. View

Jovicich J, Czanner S, Greve D, Haley E, van der Kouwe A, Gollub R . Reliability in multi-site structural MRI studies: effects of gradient non-linearity correction on phantom and human data. Neuroimage. 2005; 30(2):436-43. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.09.046. View

10.

Leow A, Yanovsky I, Parikshak N, Hua X, Lee S, Toga A . Alzheimer's disease neuroimaging initiative: a one-year follow up study using tensor-based morphometry correlating degenerative rates, biomarkers and cognition. Neuroimage. 2009; 45(3):645-55. PMC: 2696624. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.01.004. View

11.

Ashburner J, Friston K . Voxel-based morphometry--the methods. Neuroimage. 2000; 11(6 Pt 1):805-21. DOI: 10.1006/nimg.2000.0582. View

12.

Fennema-Notestine C, Gamst A, Quinn B, Pacheco J, Jernigan T, Thal L . Feasibility of multi-site clinical structural neuroimaging studies of aging using legacy data. Neuroinformatics. 2007; 5(4):235-45. DOI: 10.1007/s12021-007-9003-9. View

13.

Mortamet B, Bernstein M, Jack Jr C, Gunter J, Ward C, Britson P . Automatic quality assessment in structural brain magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Med. 2009; 62(2):365-72. PMC: 2780021. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.21992. View

14.

Clarkson M, Ourselin S, Nielsen C, Leung K, Barnes J, Whitwell J . Comparison of phantom and registration scaling corrections using the ADNI cohort. Neuroimage. 2009; 47(4):1506-13. PMC: 2800076. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.05.045. View

15.

Kruggel F . MRI-based volumetry of head compartments: normative values of healthy adults. Neuroimage. 2005; 30(1):1-11. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.09.063. View

16.

Mueller S, Weiner M, Thal L, Petersen R, Jack C, Jagust W . The Alzheimer's disease neuroimaging initiative. Neuroimaging Clin N Am. 2006; 15(4):869-77, xi-xii. PMC: 2376747. DOI: 10.1016/j.nic.2005.09.008. View

17.

Han X, Fischl B . Atlas renormalization for improved brain MR image segmentation across scanner platforms. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2007; 26(4):479-86. DOI: 10.1109/TMI.2007.893282. View

18.

Jovicich J, Czanner S, Han X, Salat D, van der Kouwe A, Quinn B . MRI-derived measurements of human subcortical, ventricular and intracranial brain volumes: Reliability effects of scan sessions, acquisition sequences, data analyses, scanner upgrade, scanner vendors and field strengths. Neuroimage. 2009; 46(1):177-92. PMC: 2866077. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.02.010. View

19.

Shuter B, Yeh I, Graham S, Au C, Wang S . Reproducibility of brain tissue volumes in longitudinal studies: effects of changes in signal-to-noise ratio and scanner software. Neuroimage. 2008; 41(2):371-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.02.003. View

20.

Roemer P, Edelstein W, Hayes C, Souza S, Mueller O . The NMR phased array. Magn Reson Med. 1990; 16(2):192-225. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.1910160203. View