Robust multi-site MR data processing: iterative optimization of bias correction, tissue classification, and registration

A robust multi-modal tool, for automated registration, bias correction, and tissue classification, has been implemented for large-scale heterogeneous multi-site longitudinal MR data analysis. This work focused on improving the an iterative optimization framework between bias-correction, registration, and tissue classification inspired from previous work. The primary contributions are robustness improvements from incorporation of following four elements: (1) utilize multi-modal and repeated scans, (2) incorporate high-deformable registration, (3) use extended set of tissue definitions, and (4) use of multi-modal aware intensity-context priors. The benefits of these enhancements were investigated by a series of experiments with both simulated brain data set (BrainWeb) and by applying to highly-heterogeneous data from a 32 site imaging study with quality assessments through the expert visual inspection. The implementation of this tool is tailored for, but not limited to, large-scale data processing with great data variation with a flexible interface. In this paper, we describe enhancements to a joint registration, bias correction, and the tissue classification, that improve the generalizability and robustness for processing multi-modal longitudinal MR scans collected at multi-sites. The tool was evaluated by using both simulated and simulated and human subject MRI images. With these enhancements, the results showed improved robustness for large-scale heterogeneous MRI processing.

[1]  John G. Csernansky,et al.  Open Access Series of Imaging Studies (OASIS): Cross-sectional MRI Data in Young, Middle Aged, Nondemented, and Demented Older Adults , 2007, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[2]  W. Eric L. Grimson,et al.  Adaptive Segmentation of MRI Data , 1995, CVRMed.

[3]  Guido Gerig,et al.  Automatic brain tumor segmentation by subject specific modification of atlas priors. , 2003, Academic radiology.

[4]  A. Brix Bayesian Data Analysis, 2nd edn , 2005 .

[5]  W. Eric L. Grimson,et al.  Adaptive Segmentation of MRI Data , 1995, CVRMed.

[6]  Bruce Fischl,et al.  Avoiding asymmetry-induced bias in longitudinal image processing , 2011, NeuroImage.

[7]  John H. Gilmore,et al.  Automatic Segmentation of Neonatal Brain MRI , 2004, MICCAI.

[8]  Anil K. Jain,et al.  A modified Hausdorff distance for object matching , 1994, Proceedings of 12th International Conference on Pattern Recognition.

[9]  Guido Gerig,et al.  An MRI Segmentation Framework for Brains with Anatomical Deviations , 2007 .

[10]  Koenraad Van Leemput,et al.  Automated model-based bias field correction of MR images of the brain , 1999, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[11]  Alan C. Evans,et al.  BrainWeb: Online Interface to a 3D MRI Simulated Brain Database , 1997 .

[12]  Brian B. Avants,et al.  An Open Source Multivariate Framework for n-Tissue Segmentation with Evaluation on Public Data , 2011, Neuroinformatics.

[13]  John K Kruschke,et al.  Bayesian data analysis. , 2010, Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science.

[14]  Hans J. Johnson,et al.  Development of a novel constellation based landmark detection algorithm , 2013, Medical Imaging.

[15]  A. Dale,et al.  Whole Brain Segmentation Automated Labeling of Neuroanatomical Structures in the Human Brain , 2002, Neuron.

[16]  John H. Gilmore,et al.  Automatic segmentation of MR images of the developing newborn brain , 2005, Medical Image Anal..

[17]  Alan C. Evans,et al.  Automatic "pipeline" analysis of 3-D MRI data for clinical trials: application to multiple sclerosis , 2002, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[18]  Swaraj Bose,et al.  Principles of Imaging in Neuro-Ophthalmology , 2009 .