Limits...
Quantifying brain volumes for Multiple Sclerosis patients follow-up in clinical practice - comparison of 1.5 and 3 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging.

Lysandropoulos AP, Absil J, Metens T, Mavroudakis N, Guisset F, Van Vlierberghe E, Smeets D, David P, Maertens A, Van Hecke W - Brain Behav (2016)

Bottom Line: The results are obtained with MSmetrix, which is developed especially for use in the MS clinical care path, and compared to Siena (FSL), a widely used software for research purposes.When data of the same scanner are compared, the error is in the order of 0.06-0.08% for both MSmetrix and Siena.MSmetrix appears robust on both the 1.5T and 3T systems and the measurement error becomes an order of magnitude higher between scanners with different field strength.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Neurology Hôpital Erasme Université Libre de Bruxelles Anderlecht Belgium.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: There is emerging evidence that brain atrophy is a part of the pathophysiology of Multiple Sclerosis (MS) and correlates with several clinical outcomes of the disease, both physical and cognitive. Consequently, brain atrophy is becoming an important parameter in patients' follow-up. Since in clinical practice both 1.5Tesla (T) and 3T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) systems are used for MS patients follow-up, questions arise regarding compatibility and a possible need for standardization.

Methods: Therefore, in this study 18 MS patients were scanned on the same day on a 1.5T and a 3T scanner. For each scanner, a 3D T1 and a 3D FLAIR were acquired. As no atrophy is expected within 1 day, these datasets can be used to evaluate the median percentage error of the brain volume measurement for gray matter (GM) volume and parenchymal volume (PV) between 1.5T and 3T scanners. The results are obtained with MSmetrix, which is developed especially for use in the MS clinical care path, and compared to Siena (FSL), a widely used software for research purposes.

Results: The MSmetrix median percentage error of the brain volume measurement between a 1.5T and a 3T scanner is 0.52% for GM and 0.35% for PV. For Siena this error equals 2.99%. When data of the same scanner are compared, the error is in the order of 0.06-0.08% for both MSmetrix and Siena.

Conclusions: MSmetrix appears robust on both the 1.5T and 3T systems and the measurement error becomes an order of magnitude higher between scanners with different field strength.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Boxplots of the measurement error. On the left, the boxplots of the absolute values of the measurement errors are shown for the parenchymal volume (A) and gray matter (B). On the right, boxplots of the measured scan–rescan PBVC (without taking the absolute value) are displayed for the parenchymal volume (C) and gray matter (D).
© Copyright Policy - creativeCommonsBy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4834931&req=5

brb3422-fig-0003: Boxplots of the measurement error. On the left, the boxplots of the absolute values of the measurement errors are shown for the parenchymal volume (A) and gray matter (B). On the right, boxplots of the measured scan–rescan PBVC (without taking the absolute value) are displayed for the parenchymal volume (C) and gray matter (D).

Mentions: Boxplots of the measurement errors of the scan–rescan evaluations are presented in Figure 3. For the within scanner comparisons of the 1.5T and 3T scanner as well as the between‐scanner comparisons, boxplots of the absolute value of the measurement error (Fig. 3A and B) and of the measured scan–rescan PBVC (Fig. 3C and D) are displayed for both PV and GM. In Figure 3, MSmetrix results are shown in green, SIENA results in blue. The corresponding median and interquartile range of the absolute value of the measurement errors are displayed in Table 3.


Quantifying brain volumes for Multiple Sclerosis patients follow-up in clinical practice - comparison of 1.5 and 3 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging.

Lysandropoulos AP, Absil J, Metens T, Mavroudakis N, Guisset F, Van Vlierberghe E, Smeets D, David P, Maertens A, Van Hecke W - Brain Behav (2016)

Boxplots of the measurement error. On the left, the boxplots of the absolute values of the measurement errors are shown for the parenchymal volume (A) and gray matter (B). On the right, boxplots of the measured scan–rescan PBVC (without taking the absolute value) are displayed for the parenchymal volume (C) and gray matter (D).
© Copyright Policy - creativeCommonsBy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4834931&req=5

brb3422-fig-0003: Boxplots of the measurement error. On the left, the boxplots of the absolute values of the measurement errors are shown for the parenchymal volume (A) and gray matter (B). On the right, boxplots of the measured scan–rescan PBVC (without taking the absolute value) are displayed for the parenchymal volume (C) and gray matter (D).
Mentions: Boxplots of the measurement errors of the scan–rescan evaluations are presented in Figure 3. For the within scanner comparisons of the 1.5T and 3T scanner as well as the between‐scanner comparisons, boxplots of the absolute value of the measurement error (Fig. 3A and B) and of the measured scan–rescan PBVC (Fig. 3C and D) are displayed for both PV and GM. In Figure 3, MSmetrix results are shown in green, SIENA results in blue. The corresponding median and interquartile range of the absolute value of the measurement errors are displayed in Table 3.

Bottom Line: The results are obtained with MSmetrix, which is developed especially for use in the MS clinical care path, and compared to Siena (FSL), a widely used software for research purposes.When data of the same scanner are compared, the error is in the order of 0.06-0.08% for both MSmetrix and Siena.MSmetrix appears robust on both the 1.5T and 3T systems and the measurement error becomes an order of magnitude higher between scanners with different field strength.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Neurology Hôpital Erasme Université Libre de Bruxelles Anderlecht Belgium.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: There is emerging evidence that brain atrophy is a part of the pathophysiology of Multiple Sclerosis (MS) and correlates with several clinical outcomes of the disease, both physical and cognitive. Consequently, brain atrophy is becoming an important parameter in patients' follow-up. Since in clinical practice both 1.5Tesla (T) and 3T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) systems are used for MS patients follow-up, questions arise regarding compatibility and a possible need for standardization.

Methods: Therefore, in this study 18 MS patients were scanned on the same day on a 1.5T and a 3T scanner. For each scanner, a 3D T1 and a 3D FLAIR were acquired. As no atrophy is expected within 1 day, these datasets can be used to evaluate the median percentage error of the brain volume measurement for gray matter (GM) volume and parenchymal volume (PV) between 1.5T and 3T scanners. The results are obtained with MSmetrix, which is developed especially for use in the MS clinical care path, and compared to Siena (FSL), a widely used software for research purposes.

Results: The MSmetrix median percentage error of the brain volume measurement between a 1.5T and a 3T scanner is 0.52% for GM and 0.35% for PV. For Siena this error equals 2.99%. When data of the same scanner are compared, the error is in the order of 0.06-0.08% for both MSmetrix and Siena.

Conclusions: MSmetrix appears robust on both the 1.5T and 3T systems and the measurement error becomes an order of magnitude higher between scanners with different field strength.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus