Comparison of quality control software tools for diffusion tensor imaging.

Image quality of diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) is critical for image interpretation, diagnostic accuracy and efficiency. However, DTI is susceptible to numerous detrimental artifacts that may impair the reliability and validity of the obtained data. Although many quality control (QC) software tools are being developed and are widely used and each has its different tradeoffs, there is still no general agreement on an image quality control routine for DTIs, and the practical impact of these tradeoffs is not well studied. An objective comparison that identifies the pros and cons of each of the QC tools will be helpful for the users to make the best choice among tools for specific DTI applications. This study aims to quantitatively compare the effectiveness of three popular QC tools including DTI studio (Johns Hopkins University), DTIprep (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, University of Iowa and University of Utah) and TORTOISE (National Institute of Health). Both synthetic and in vivo human brain data were used to quantify adverse effects of major DTI artifacts to tensor calculation as well as the effectiveness of different QC tools in identifying and correcting these artifacts. The technical basis of each tool was discussed, and the ways in which particular techniques affect the output of each of the tools were analyzed. The different functions and I/O formats that three QC tools provide for building a general DTI processing pipeline and integration with other popular image processing tools were also discussed.

[1]  Christine H. Lorenz,et al.  Image Corruption Detection in Diffusion Tensor Imaging for Post-Processing and Real-Time Monitoring , 2013, PloS one.

[2]  H. Gudbjartsson,et al.  The rician distribution of noisy mri data , 1995, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[3]  D. Le Bihan,et al.  Artifacts and pitfalls in diffusion MRI , 2006, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[4]  S. Skare,et al.  On the effects of gating in diffusion imaging of the brain using single shot EPI. , 2001, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[5]  Derek K. Jones,et al.  RESTORE: Robust estimation of tensors by outlier rejection , 2005, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[6]  D. Le Bihan,et al.  Diffusion tensor imaging: Concepts and applications , 2001, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[7]  C. Pierpaoli,et al.  Analyzing the contribution of cardiac pulsation to the variability of quantities derived from the diffusion tensor , 2002 .

[8]  Nancy C. Andreasen,et al.  Evaluation of the GTRACT diffusion tensor tractography algorithm: A validation and reliability study , 2006, NeuroImage.

[9]  F. Ståhlberg,et al.  Pulsatile brain movement and associated hydrodynamics studied by magnetic resonance phase imaging , 2004, Neuroradiology.

[10]  Hangyi Jiang,et al.  DtiStudio: Resource program for diffusion tensor computation and fiber bundle tracking , 2006, Comput. Methods Programs Biomed..

[11]  Yi Wang,et al.  Quality control of diffusion weighted images , 2010, Medical Imaging.

[12]  B. Brown Proceedings of the Society of Photo-optical Instrumentation Engineers , 1975 .

[13]  Carlo Pierpaoli,et al.  Informed RESTORE: A method for robust estimation of diffusion tensor from low redundancy datasets in the presence of physiological noise artifacts , 2012, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[14]  Jacques-Donald Tournier,et al.  Diffusion tensor imaging and beyond , 2011, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[15]  Denis Le Bihan,et al.  Diffusion and Perfusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Applications to Functional Mri , 1995 .

[16]  P. Basser,et al.  Toward a quantitative assessment of diffusion anisotropy , 1996, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[17]  Dongrong Xu,et al.  Automated artifact detection and removal for improved tensor estimation in motion-corrupted DTI data sets using the combination of local binary patterns and 2D partial least squares. , 2011, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[18]  Jerry L. Prince,et al.  Effects of diffusion weighting schemes on the reproducibility of DTI-derived fractional anisotropy, mean diffusivity, and principal eigenvector measurements at 1.5T , 2007, NeuroImage.

[19]  D L Parker,et al.  Comparison of gradient encoding schemes for diffusion‐tensor MRI , 2001, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[20]  M. Horsfield,et al.  Optimal strategies for measuring diffusion in anisotropic systems by magnetic resonance imaging , 1999, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[21]  A. H. Andersen,et al.  On the Rician distribution of noisy MRI data , 1996, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[22]  Mark Doran Diffusion and Perfusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Applications to Functional MRI , 1996 .

[23]  Xing Qiu,et al.  Quantification of accuracy and precision of multi-center DTI measurements: A diffusion phantom and human brain study , 2011, NeuroImage.