Brought to you by
ECR 2018 / C-1387
Morphological brain images acquired with a tilting MRI scanner: feasibility and quality evaluations
Congress: ECR 2018
Poster No.: C-1387
Type: Scientific Exhibit
Keywords: Anatomy, Neuroradiology brain, MR, Segmentation, Education and training
Authors: M. Laganà1, S. Carrara1, M. Olmi2, M. Cresti2, L. Forzoni3, P. Cecconi4; 1Milano/IT, 2Genova/IT, 3Firenze/IT, 4Como (CO)/IT
DOI:10.1594/ecr2018/C-1387

Results

The 3D T1 images obtained for the two subjects with the two scanners in the supine position are reported in Figure 1. The 3D T1 images of Subject 2 in the supine and sitting position at 0.25 T are shown in Figure 2.

 

Fig. 1: 3DT1 of the two subjects, acquired with the two scanners and in different positions. Subject 1 (A and B) and Subject 2 (C and D) at 1.5 T (A, C) and at 0.25 T (B, D). Corresponding axial exemplificative slices were chosen for a proper comparison.
References: Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi ONLUS, Milan, Italy

 

Fig. 2: Comparison of 3DT1 of Subject 2, acquired at 0.25 T while he was sitting and supine. Corresponding axial exemplificative slices were chosen for a proper comparison.
References: Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi ONLUS, Milan, Italy

Tissue segmentation and volumes

The performance of the GM segmentation obtained with the two scanners is shown in Figure 3, where the GM obtained at 0.25 T was coregistered and superimposed to the GM obtained at 1.5 T.

The differences between the corresponding volumes obtained at 1.5 T vs 0.25 T, normalized by their average, are shown in the 2nd and 3rd columns of Table 1 (one for each subject), where positive values mean that the tissue of interest is overestimated at 0.25 T compared to 1.5 T.

The differences between supine and sitting position at 0.25 T, normalized by their average, are reported in the 4th column of Table 1. Positive values mean higher values in the supine vs sitting position.

The repeatability obtained at 1.5 T is reported in the 5th column of Table 1. Positive values mean higher values for the first acquisition, compared to the second one.

 

Table 1. Comparisons between scanners, positions, and runs. The difference of corresponding tissue volumes, normalized by their average, is reported. Legend: GM=grey matter; pGM=peripheral GM; SGM=subcortical GM; WM=white matter; vCSF=ventricular cerebrospinal fluid; Brain=brain =GM+WM.

Tissue

Subject 1:

1.5 vs 0.25 T

Subject 2:

1.5 vs 0.25 T

Subject 2:

Supine vs WB

Subject2:

scan 1 vs scan 2

GM

5.67%

-1.21%

-3.10%

0.96%

pGM

10.33%

2.35%

1.09%

0.35%

SGM

3.60%

0.73%

0.06%

2.68%

WM

-1.35%

-3.02%

-4.77%

-1.51%

vCSF

0.08%

-9.35%

-4.67%

0.12%

Brain

2.33%

-2.08%

-3.90%

-0.22%

 

SNR

The SNR obtained with the two scanners in the whole brain was: 9.22 and 54.39 for the Subject 1 at 0.25 T and 1.5 T respectively; 9.90 and 10.29 for the Subject 2 at 0.25 T in the supine and sitting positions respectively, and 48.86 and 54.59 for the two different acquisitions of Subject 2 at 1.5 T.

Contrasts

The differences of the contrasts obtained at 1.5 T vs 0.25 T, normalized by their average, are reported in Table 2 for the two subjects. All the values are positive, which means higher SNR at 1.5 T.

 

Table 2. Differences between 1.5 T and 0.25 T contrasts, normalized by their average.

 

Subject 1

1.5 vs 0.25 T

Subject 2

1.5 vs 0.25 T

WMvsGM

1.55%

4.81%

WMvsCSF

10.17%

3.80%

GMvsCSF

14.64%

4.02%

 

POSTER ACTIONS Add bookmark Contact presenter Send to a friend Download pdf
SHARE THIS POSTER
2 clicks for more privacy: On the first click the button will be activated and you can then share the poster with a second click.

This website uses cookies. Learn more