Stand-By Time
Wednesday, June 28, 2017: 12:45 PM - 2:45 PM
Submission No:
3454
Submission Type:
Abstract Submission
On Display:
Wednesday, June 28 & Thursday, June 29
Authors:
Rene Seiger1, Andreas Hahn1, Sebastian Ganger1, Siegfried Kasper1, Rupert Lanzenberger1
Institutions:
1Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
First Author:
Introduction:
The cerebral cortex of the human brain is highly folded with an average thickness of around 2.5 mm, which varies between 1 and 4.5 mm across different brain regions (Fischl & Dale, 2000). The analysis of cortical thickness is an important approach to gain valuable in-vivo information about normal and abnormal neuroanatomy in the healthy and diseased human brain. This is especially of interest when older participants are investigated where cognitive decline and dementia are observed. FreeSurfer is an established software suite which is used for automated cortical assessments with high accuracy. Recently, the computational anatomy toolbox for SPM (CAT12) has been published which allows for faster and easier assessment of cortical thickness estimations. However, if both methods deliver similar and comparable results, still remains to be determined.
Methods:
Structural MRI scans (1.5 Tesla, T1-weighted MPRAGE sequence; voxel size=1x1x1; dim=256x256x160; TR=9.7ms; TE=4.0ms) from 45 right-handed elderly healthy female subjects (77.4±8.5 (mean age ±SD)) freely available from the Open Access Series of Imaging Studies (OASIS) database (http://www.oasis-brains.org/) have been used for this methodological comparison. For each subject, 3–4 individual images were acquired in a single session (Marcus et al., 2007). All subjects were processed with FreeSurfer 5.3 and CAT12 (r1012) within SPM12 (v6225) using MATLAB R2013b. After processing using default values for both software suites, cortical thickness estimations were extracted for each region of interest (ROI) using the Desikan-Killiany atlas (Desikan et al., 2006) with 34 regions of interest. Subsequently, paired t-tests were carried out to assess ROI-wise differences between the two different methodological approaches. Only values of the left hemisphere are reported.
Results:
The CAT12 toolbox yielded higher cortical thickness estimations (2.64±0.37 (mean±SD)) in comparison to FreeSurfer (2.35±0.36) in almost all 34 observed ROIs. Only thickness values for the 'caudal anterior cingulate' were identical for both methods (FreeSurfer=2.63±0.39; CAT12=2.63 ±0.33). 26 of 33 regions, which showed higher estimations for the CAT12 toolbox reached statistical significance (p<0.05) corrected for multiple comparisons.
Conclusions:
This investigation revealed that estimations of cortical thickness vary strongly between both methods with higher thickness values across the entire cerebral cortex for the CAT12 toolbox. This indicates that results gained for each method are not directly comparable which should be kept in mind when comparing values from this new CAT12 toolbox to values extracted with FreeSurfer using an ROI-wise approach. Although MRI measurements from an older study population were used for this comparison, results are also applicable for younger populations of subjects.
Imaging Methods:
Anatomical MRI 1
Neuroanatomy:
Cortical Anatomy and Brain Mapping 2
Keywords:
MRI
STRUCTURAL MRI
1|2Indicates the priority used for review
Would you accept an oral presentation if your abstract is selected for an oral session?
Yes
I would be willing to discuss my abstract with members of the press should my abstract be marked newsworthy:
Yes
Please indicate below if your study was a "resting state" or "task-activation” study.
Other
By submitting your proposal, you grant permission for the Organization for Human Brain Mapping (OHBM) to distribute the presentation in any format, including video, audio print and electronic text through OHBM OnDemand, social media channels or other electronic media and on the OHBM website.
I accept
Healthy subjects only or patients (note that patient studies may also involve healthy subjects):
Healthy subjects
Internal Review Board (IRB) or Animal Use and Care Committee (AUCC) Approval. Please indicate approval below. Please note: Failure to have IRB or AUCC approval, if applicable will lead to automatic rejection of abstract.
Yes, I have IRB or AUCC approval
Please indicate which methods were used in your research:
Structural MRI
For human MRI, what field strength scanner do you use?
1.5T
Which processing packages did you use for your study?
SPM
Free Surfer
Provide references in author date format
Desikan, R. (2006), An automated labeling system for subdividing the human cerebral cortex on MRI scans into gyral based regions of interest. NeuroImage, 31(3), 968–980. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.01.021
Fischl, B., & Dale, A.M. (2000), Measuring the thickness of the human cerebral cortex from magnetic resonance images. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 97(20), 11050–5. http://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.200033797
Marcus, D.S. (2007), Open Access Series of Imaging Studies (OASIS): cross-sectional MRI data in young, middle aged, nondemented, and demented older adults. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19(9), 1498–507. http://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2007.19.9.1498