Quantitative T2 analysis: The effects of noise, regularization, and multivoxel approaches

Thorarin A. Bjarnason, Cheryl R. McCreary, Jeff F. Dunn, Joseph Ross Mitchell

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

31 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Typical quantitative T2 (qT2) analysis involves creating T2 distributions using a regularized algorithm from region-of-interest averaged decay data. This study uses qT2 analysis of simulated and experimental decay signals to determine how (a) noise-type, (b) regularization, and (c) region-of-interest versus multivoxel analyses affect T2 distributions. Our simulations indicate that regularization causes myelin water fraction and intra/extracellular water geometric mean T 2 underestimation that worsens as the signal-to-noise ratio decreases. The underestimation was greater for intra/extracellular water geometric mean T2 measures using Rician noise. Simulations showed significant differences between myelin water fractions determined using region-of-interest and multivoxel approaches compared to the true value. The nonregularized voxel-based approach gave the most accurate measure of myelin water fraction and intra/extracellular water geometric mean T2 for a given signal-to-noise ratio and noise type. Additionally, multivoxel analysis provides important information about the variability of the analysis. Results obtained from in vivo rat data were similar to our simulation results. In each case, a nonregularized, multivoxel analysis provided myelin water fractions significantly different from the regularized approaches and obtained the largest myelin water fraction. We conclude that quantitative T2 analysis is best performed using a nonregularized, multivoxel approach.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)212-217
Number of pages6
JournalMagnetic Resonance in Medicine
Volume63
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2010
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Noise
Myelin Sheath
Water
Signal-To-Noise Ratio

Keywords

  • Rat
  • T distribution
  • T relaxation
  • Voxel-based analysis
  • White matter

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Quantitative T2 analysis : The effects of noise, regularization, and multivoxel approaches. / Bjarnason, Thorarin A.; McCreary, Cheryl R.; Dunn, Jeff F.; Mitchell, Joseph Ross.

In: Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, Vol. 63, No. 1, 01.2010, p. 212-217.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Bjarnason, Thorarin A. ; McCreary, Cheryl R. ; Dunn, Jeff F. ; Mitchell, Joseph Ross. / Quantitative T2 analysis : The effects of noise, regularization, and multivoxel approaches. In: Magnetic Resonance in Medicine. 2010 ; Vol. 63, No. 1. pp. 212-217.
@article{97689390902047f2b2b2e748d70e3106,
title = "Quantitative T2 analysis: The effects of noise, regularization, and multivoxel approaches",
abstract = "Typical quantitative T2 (qT2) analysis involves creating T2 distributions using a regularized algorithm from region-of-interest averaged decay data. This study uses qT2 analysis of simulated and experimental decay signals to determine how (a) noise-type, (b) regularization, and (c) region-of-interest versus multivoxel analyses affect T2 distributions. Our simulations indicate that regularization causes myelin water fraction and intra/extracellular water geometric mean T 2 underestimation that worsens as the signal-to-noise ratio decreases. The underestimation was greater for intra/extracellular water geometric mean T2 measures using Rician noise. Simulations showed significant differences between myelin water fractions determined using region-of-interest and multivoxel approaches compared to the true value. The nonregularized voxel-based approach gave the most accurate measure of myelin water fraction and intra/extracellular water geometric mean T2 for a given signal-to-noise ratio and noise type. Additionally, multivoxel analysis provides important information about the variability of the analysis. Results obtained from in vivo rat data were similar to our simulation results. In each case, a nonregularized, multivoxel analysis provided myelin water fractions significantly different from the regularized approaches and obtained the largest myelin water fraction. We conclude that quantitative T2 analysis is best performed using a nonregularized, multivoxel approach.",
keywords = "Rat, T distribution, T relaxation, Voxel-based analysis, White matter",
author = "Bjarnason, {Thorarin A.} and McCreary, {Cheryl R.} and Dunn, {Jeff F.} and Mitchell, {Joseph Ross}",
year = "2010",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1002/mrm.22173",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "63",
pages = "212--217",
journal = "Magnetic Resonance in Medicine",
issn = "0740-3194",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Quantitative T2 analysis

T2 - The effects of noise, regularization, and multivoxel approaches

AU - Bjarnason, Thorarin A.

AU - McCreary, Cheryl R.

AU - Dunn, Jeff F.

AU - Mitchell, Joseph Ross

PY - 2010/1

Y1 - 2010/1

N2 - Typical quantitative T2 (qT2) analysis involves creating T2 distributions using a regularized algorithm from region-of-interest averaged decay data. This study uses qT2 analysis of simulated and experimental decay signals to determine how (a) noise-type, (b) regularization, and (c) region-of-interest versus multivoxel analyses affect T2 distributions. Our simulations indicate that regularization causes myelin water fraction and intra/extracellular water geometric mean T 2 underestimation that worsens as the signal-to-noise ratio decreases. The underestimation was greater for intra/extracellular water geometric mean T2 measures using Rician noise. Simulations showed significant differences between myelin water fractions determined using region-of-interest and multivoxel approaches compared to the true value. The nonregularized voxel-based approach gave the most accurate measure of myelin water fraction and intra/extracellular water geometric mean T2 for a given signal-to-noise ratio and noise type. Additionally, multivoxel analysis provides important information about the variability of the analysis. Results obtained from in vivo rat data were similar to our simulation results. In each case, a nonregularized, multivoxel analysis provided myelin water fractions significantly different from the regularized approaches and obtained the largest myelin water fraction. We conclude that quantitative T2 analysis is best performed using a nonregularized, multivoxel approach.

AB - Typical quantitative T2 (qT2) analysis involves creating T2 distributions using a regularized algorithm from region-of-interest averaged decay data. This study uses qT2 analysis of simulated and experimental decay signals to determine how (a) noise-type, (b) regularization, and (c) region-of-interest versus multivoxel analyses affect T2 distributions. Our simulations indicate that regularization causes myelin water fraction and intra/extracellular water geometric mean T 2 underestimation that worsens as the signal-to-noise ratio decreases. The underestimation was greater for intra/extracellular water geometric mean T2 measures using Rician noise. Simulations showed significant differences between myelin water fractions determined using region-of-interest and multivoxel approaches compared to the true value. The nonregularized voxel-based approach gave the most accurate measure of myelin water fraction and intra/extracellular water geometric mean T2 for a given signal-to-noise ratio and noise type. Additionally, multivoxel analysis provides important information about the variability of the analysis. Results obtained from in vivo rat data were similar to our simulation results. In each case, a nonregularized, multivoxel analysis provided myelin water fractions significantly different from the regularized approaches and obtained the largest myelin water fraction. We conclude that quantitative T2 analysis is best performed using a nonregularized, multivoxel approach.

KW - Rat

KW - T distribution

KW - T relaxation

KW - Voxel-based analysis

KW - White matter

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=73349083009&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=73349083009&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/mrm.22173

DO - 10.1002/mrm.22173

M3 - Article

C2 - 20027599

AN - SCOPUS:73349083009

VL - 63

SP - 212

EP - 217

JO - Magnetic Resonance in Medicine

JF - Magnetic Resonance in Medicine

SN - 0740-3194

IS - 1

ER -