Simple fMRI Postprocessing Suffices for Normal Clinical Practice

Here, 2 postprocessing methods for fMRI were tested: a simple commercially available one against one commonly used for more advanced research. The authors compared visual concordance, image quality, voxel size, and radiologist preferences and concluded that widely available commercial fMRI software can provide reliable information for therapeutic management, meaning sophisticated, less widely available software is unnecessary in most cases. (See the accompanying commentary by Pillai.) BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Whereas fMRI postprocessing tools used in research are accurate but unwieldy, those used for clinical practice are user-friendly but are less accurate. We aimed to determine whether commercial software for fMRI postprocessing is accurate enough for clinical practice. METHODS: Ten volunteers underwent fMRI while performing motor and language tasks (hand, foot, and orolingual movements; verbal fluency; semantic judgment; and oral comprehension). We compared visual concordance, image quality (noise), voxel size, and radiologist preference for the activation maps obtained by using Neuro3D software (provided with our MR imaging scanner) and by using the SPM program commonly used in research. RESULTS: Maps obtained with the 2 methods were classified as “partially overlapping” for 70% for motor and 72% for language paradigm experiments and as “overlapping” in 30% of motor and in 15% of language paradigm experiments. CONCLUSIONS: fMRI is a helpful and robust tool in clinical practice for planning neurosurgery. Widely available commercial fMRI software can provide reliable information for therapeutic management, so sophisticated, less widely available software is unnecessary in most cases.