Detection and measurement of coverage loss in interleaved multi-acquisition brain MRIs due to motion-induced inter-slice misalignment

In MRI scans that are acquired in a slice-by-slice manner, patient motion during scanning can cause adjacent slices to overlap, resulting in duplicate coverage in some areas and missing coverage in others. Scans in which multiple slices are acquired simultaneously and interleaved with other sets of slices are particularly vulnerable because a single movement can result in the misalignment and overlap of many slices. Despite the fact that considerable data losses can occur even with few visible artifacts, this problem has received very little attention from MRI researchers. The primary goals of this paper are: (1) to raise awareness of the problem in the MRI community and (2) to present an efficient multiscale algorithm that accurately quantifies the amount of data loss. Validation of the algorithm's accuracy is performed on 200 scans with simulated patient motion so that the true amount of data loss is known for each scan. The motion parameters are chosen to simulate scans that have significant data loss (mean missing coverage=14.39% of head volume, SD=6.61%, range=2.76-32.98%) but with few visual indications of the problem. The algorithm is shown to be very accurate, yielding estimates that differ from the true values by a mean of only 1.1% point (SD=0.98pt, range=0.00-6.54pt). The algorithm is also shown to be consistent and robust when tested on a large set of scans from a recent multiple sclerosis clinical trial.

[1]  D. Miller,et al.  Lesion volume measurement in multiple sclerosis: How important is accurate repositioning? , 1996, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[2]  The effect of cross-talk on MRI lesion numbers and volumes in multiple sclerosis using conventional and turbo spin-echo , 1998, Multiple sclerosis.

[3]  D R Haynor,et al.  Partial volume tissue classification of multichannel magnetic resonance images-a mixel model. , 1991, IEEE transactions on medical imaging.

[4]  N. Otsu A threshold selection method from gray level histograms , 1979 .

[5]  Eman N. Ali,et al.  Neuroimaging in multiple sclerosis. , 2005, Neurologic clinics.

[6]  Carolyn Kaut,et al.  MRI in Practice , 1993 .

[7]  Max A. Viergever,et al.  Mutual-information-based registration of medical images: a survey , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[8]  David H. Eberly,et al.  Geometric Tools for Computer Graphics , 2002 .

[9]  Anthony Traboulsee,et al.  Neuroimaging in multiple sclerosis. , 2005, Neurologic clinics.

[10]  R M Harrison,et al.  Partial volume effects in MRI studies of multiple sclerosis. , 1999, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[11]  D Atkinson,et al.  Automatic compensation of motion artifacts in MRI , 1999, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[12]  Max A. Viergever,et al.  Quantitative evaluation of convolution-based methods for medical image interpolation , 2001, Medical Image Anal..

[13]  Bülent Sankur,et al.  Statistical evaluation of image quality measures , 2002, J. Electronic Imaging.

[14]  Wei Lin,et al.  Correcting bulk in-plane motion artifacts in MRI using the point spread function , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[15]  J A Frank,et al.  Guidelines for using quantitative measures of brain magnetic resonance imaging abnormalities in monitoring the treatment of multiple sclerosis , 1998, Annals of neurology.