Purpose The aim of this study was to develop a robust post-processing workflow for motion-corrupted datasets in diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI). Materials and methods The proposed workflow consisted of brain extraction, rigid registration, distortion correction, artifacts rejection, spatial smoothing and tensor estimation. Rigid registration was utilized to correct misalignments. Motion artifacts were rejected by using local Pearson correlation coefficient (LPCC). The performance of LPCC in characterizing relative differences between artifacts and artifact-free images was compared with that of the conventional correlation coefficient in 10 randomly selected DKI datasets. The influence of rejected artifacts with information of gradient directions and b values for the parameter estimation was investigated by using mean square error (MSE). The variance of noise was used as the criterion for MSEs. The clinical practicality of the proposed workflow was evaluated by the image quality and measurements in regions of interest on 36 DKI datasets, including 18 artifact-free (18 pediatric subjects) and 18 motion-corrupted datasets (15 pediatric subjects and 3 essential tremor patients). Results The relative difference between artifacts and artifact-free images calculated by LPCC was larger than that of the conventional correlation coefficient (p<0.05). It indicated that LPCC was more sensitive in detecting motion artifacts. MSEs of all derived parameters from the reserved data after the artifacts rejection were smaller than the variance of the noise. It suggested that influence of rejected artifacts was less than influence of noise on the precision of derived parameters. The proposed workflow improved the image quality and reduced the measurement biases significantly on motion-corrupted datasets (p<0.05). Conclusion The proposed post-processing workflow was reliable to improve the image quality and the measurement precision of the derived parameters on motion-corrupted DKI datasets. The workflow provided an effective post-processing method for clinical applications of DKI in subjects with involuntary movements.
References
[1]
Pierpaoli C (2010) Artifacts in diffusion MRI. Diffusion MRI: Theory, Methods and Applications, Oxford University Press, New York: 303–318.
[2]
Jensen JH, Helpern JA, Ramani A, Lu H, Kaczynski K (2005) Diffusional kurtosis imaging: The quantification of non-gaussian water diffusion by means of magnetic resonance imaging. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 53: 1432–1440. doi: 10.1002/mrm.20508
[3]
Wu EX, Cheung MM (2010) MR diffusion kurtosis imaging for neural tissue characterization. NMR in biomedicine 23: 836–848. doi: 10.1002/nbm.1506
[4]
Heemsterk A, Leemans A, Plaisier A, Pieterman K, Lequin M, et al. (2013) Acquisition guidelines and quality assessment tools for analyzing neonatal diffusion tensor MRI data. American Journal of Neuroradiology 34: 1496–1505. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.a3465
[5]
Zhou Z, Liu W, Cui J, Wang X, Arias D, et al. (2011) Automated artifact detection and removal for improved tensor estimation in motion-corrupted DTI data sets using the combination of local binary patterns and 2D partial least squares. Magnetic Resonance Imaging 29: 230–242. doi: 10.1016/j.mri.2010.06.022
[6]
Mangin JF, Poupon C, Clark C, Le Bihan D, Bloch I (2002) Distortion correction and robust tensor estimation for MR diffusion imaging. Medical Image Analysis 6: 191–198. doi: 10.1016/s1361-8415(02)00079-8
[7]
Chang LC, Jones DK, Pierpaoli C (2005) RESTORE: robust estimation of tensors by outlier rejection. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 53: 1088–1095. doi: 10.1002/mrm.20426
[8]
Pannek K, Guzzetta A, Colditz PB, Rose SE (2012) Diffusion MRI of the neonate brain: acquisition, processing and analysis techniques. Pediatric Radiology 42: 1169–1182. doi: 10.1007/s00247-012-2427-x
[9]
Liu Z, Wang Y, Gerig G, Gouttard S, Tao R, et al.. (2010) Quality control of diffusion weighted images. Proceedings of SPIE. San Diego, California, USA. pp. 76280J.
[10]
Jiang H, Chou M, van Zijl P, Mori S (2009) Outlier detection for diffusion tensor imaging by testing for ADC consistency. Proceedings of 17th Annual Meeting ISMRM. San Diego, California, USA. pp. 1404.
[11]
Li Y, Shea SM, Lorenz CH, Jiang H, Chou M-C, et al. (2013) Image Corruption Detection in Diffusion Tensor Imaging for Post-Processing and Real-Time Monitoring. PLOS ONE 8: e49764. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0049764
[12]
Holdsworth SJ, Aksoy M, Newbould RD, Yeom K, Van AT, et al. (2012) Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) with retrospective motion correction for large-scale pediatric imaging. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging 36: 961–971. doi: 10.1002/jmri.23710
[13]
Ji L, Gallo K (2006) An agreement coefficient for image comparison. Photogrammetric engineering and remote sensing 72: 823–833. doi: 10.14358/pers.72.7.823
[14]
Tabesh A, Jensen JH, Ardekani BA, Helpern JA (2011) Estimation of tensors and tensor-derived measures in diffusional kurtosis imaging. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 65: 823–836. doi: 10.1002/mrm.22655
[15]
Smith S, Jenkinson M, Woolrich M, Beckmann C, Behrens T, et al. (2004) Advances in functional and structural MR image analysis and implementation as FSL. Neuroimage 23: S208–S219. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.07.051
[16]
Woods RP, Grafton ST, Holmes CJ, Cherry SR, Mazziotta JC (1998) Automated image registration: I. General methods and intrasubject, intramodality validation. Journal of computer assisted tomography 22: 139–152. doi: 10.1097/00004728-199801000-00027
[17]
Hui ES, Cheung MM, Qi L, Wu EX (2008) Towards better MR characterization of neural tissues using directional diffusion kurtosis analysis. Neuroimage 42: 122–134. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.04.237
[18]
Qi L, Wang Y, Wu EX (2008) D-eigenvalues of diffusion kurtosis tensors. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics 221: 150–157. doi: 10.1016/j.cam.2007.10.012
[19]
Widrow B, Glover JR Jr, McCool JM, Kaunitz J, Williams CS, et al. (1975) Adaptive noise cancelling: Principles and applications. Proceedings of the IEEE 63: 1692–1716. doi: 10.1109/proc.1975.10036
[20]
Jensen JH, Helpern JA (2010) MRI quantification of non-Gaussian water diffusion by kurtosis analysis. NMR in biomedicine 23: 698–710. doi: 10.1002/nbm.1518
[21]
Fukunaga I, Hori M, Masutani Y, Hamasaki N, Sato S, et al. (2013) Effects of diffusional kurtosis imaging parameters on diffusion quantification. Radiological physics and technology 6: 343–348. doi: 10.1007/s12194-013-0206-5
[22]
Veraart J, Poot DHJ, Van Hecke W, Blockx I, Van der Linden A, et al. (2011) More accurate estimation of diffusion tensor parameters using diffusion kurtosis imaging. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 65: 138–145. doi: 10.1002/mrm.22603
