Identical, but not the same: Intra-site and inter-site reproducibility of fractional anisotropy measures on two 3.0 T scanners

Diffusion Tensor Imaging (DTI) is being increasingly used to assess white matter integrity and it is therefore paramount to address the test–retest reliability of DTI measures. In this study we assessed inter- and intra-site reproducibility of two nominally identical 3 T scanners at different sites in nine healthy controls using a DTI protocol representative of typical current “best practice” including cardiac gating, a multichannel head coil, parallel imaging and optimized diffusion gradient parameters. We calculated coefficients of variation (CV) and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) of fractional anisotropy (FA) measures for the whole brain, for three regions of interest (ROI) and for three tracts derived from these ROI by probabilistic tracking. We assessed the impact of affine, nonlinear and template based methods for spatially aligning FA maps on the reproducibility. The intra-site CV for FA ranged from 0.8% to 3.0% with ICC from 0.90 to 0.99, while the inter-site CV ranged from 1.0% to 4.1% with ICC of 0.82 to 0.99. Nonlinear image coregistration improved reproducibility compared to affine coregistration. Normalization to template space reduced the between-subject variation, resulting in lower ICC values and indicating a possibly reduced sensitivity. CV from probabilistic tractography were about 50% higher than for the corresponding seed ROI. Reproducibility maps of the whole scan volume showed a low variation of less than 5% in the major white matter tracts but higher variations of 10–15% in gray matter regions. One of the two scanners showed better intra-site reproducibility, while the intra-site CV for both scanners was significantly better than inter-site CV. However, when using nonlinear coregistration of FA maps, the average inter-site CV was below 2%. There was a consistent inter-site bias, FA values on site 2 were 1.0–1.5% lower than on site 1. Correction for this bias with a global scaling factor reduced the inter-site CV to the range of intra-site CV. Our results are encouraging for multi-centre DTI studies in larger populations, but also illustrate the importance of the image processing pipeline for reproducibility.

[1]  P. Basser,et al.  Microstructural and physiological features of tissues elucidated by quantitative-diffusion-tensor MRI. , 1996, Journal of magnetic resonance. Series B.

[2]  A. Pfefferbaum,et al.  Replicability of diffusion tensor imaging measurements of fractional anisotropy and trace in brain , 2003, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

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

[4]  Timothy Edward John Behrens,et al.  Between session reproducibility and between subject variability of diffusion MR and tractography measures , 2006, NeuroImage.

[5]  Gareth J. Barker,et al.  From diffusion tractography to quantitative white matter tract measures: a reproducibility study , 2003, NeuroImage.

[6]  M. Filippi,et al.  Inter-sequence and inter-imaging unit variability of diffusion tensor MR imaging histogram-derived metrics of the brain in healthy volunteers. , 2003, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[7]  David Bonekamp,et al.  Diffusion tensor imaging in children and adolescents: Reproducibility, hemispheric, and age-related differences , 2007, NeuroImage.

[8]  Daniel C. Alexander,et al.  Camino: Open-Source Diffusion-MRI Reconstruction and Processing , 2006 .

[9]  Nikolaus Weiskopf,et al.  A method for improving the performance of gradient systems for diffusion-weighted MRI , 2007, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[10]  Meng Law,et al.  Applications of Diffusion Tensor MR Imaging in Multiple Sclerosis , 2005, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[11]  Gareth J. Barker,et al.  Investigating Cervical Spinal Cord Structure Using Axial Diffusion Tensor Imaging , 2002, NeuroImage.

[12]  Timothy Edward John Behrens,et al.  Characterization and propagation of uncertainty in diffusion‐weighted MR imaging , 2003, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[13]  Konstantinos Arfanakis,et al.  Contribution of cardiac‐induced brain pulsation to the noise of the diffusion tensor in Turboprop diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) , 2008, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[14]  Roland G. Henry,et al.  Bootstrap quantification of cardiac pulsation artifact in DTI , 2010, NeuroImage.

[15]  Yu-Chien Wu,et al.  Comparison of diffusion tensor imaging measurements at 3.0 T versus 1.5 T with and without parallel imaging. , 2006, Neuroimaging clinics of North America.

[16]  Klaas Nicolay,et al.  Reproducibility of Quantitative Cerebral T2 Relaxometry, Diffusion Tensor Imaging, and 1H Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy at 3.0 Tesla , 2007, Investigative radiology.

[17]  Usha Sinha,et al.  Quantitative Metrics for Evaluating Parallel Acquisition Techniques in Diffusion Tensor Imaging at 3 Tesla , 2006, Investigative radiology.

[18]  D. Bohning,et al.  Reproducibility, Interrater Agreement, and Age-Related Changes of Fractional Anisotropy Measures at 3T in Healthy Subjects: Effect of the Applied b-Value , 2008, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[19]  Derek K. Jones,et al.  Isotropic resolution diffusion tensor imaging with whole brain acquisition in a clinically acceptable time , 2002, Human brain mapping.

[20]  S Ekholm,et al.  Effects of number of diffusion gradient directions on derived diffusion tensor imaging indices in human brain. , 2006, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[21]  Stephen M Smith,et al.  Fast robust automated brain extraction , 2002, Human brain mapping.

[22]  John S. Duncan,et al.  Voxel-based diffusion tensor imaging in patients with mesial temporal lobe epilepsy and hippocampal sclerosis , 2008, NeuroImage.

[23]  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.

[24]  N G Papadakis,et al.  A comparative study of acquisition schemes for diffusion tensor imaging using MRI. , 1999, Journal of magnetic resonance.

[25]  C. Rorden,et al.  Stereotaxic display of brain lesions. , 2000, Behavioural neurology.

[26]  A. Pfefferbaum,et al.  Diffusion tensor imaging and aging , 2006, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.