Browsing by Author "Kao, Hung-Wen"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The Impact of Edema and Fiber Crossing on Diffusion MRI Metrics: DBSI vs. Diffusion ODF
    (Wiley, 2021) Ye, Zezhong; Gary, Sam E.; Sun, Peng; Mustafi, Sourajit Mitra; Glenn, George Russell; Yeh, Fang-Cheng; Merisaari, Harri; Huang, Guo-Shu; Kao, Hung-Wen; Lin, Chien-Yuan; Wu, Yu-Chien; Jensen, Jens H.; Song, Sheng-Kwei; Radiology and Imaging Sciences, School of Medicine
    Purpose Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) has been employed for over two decades to noninvasively quantify central nervous system (CNS) diseases/injuries. However, DTI is an inadequate simplification of diffusion modeling in the presence of co-existing inflammation, edema, and crossing nerve fibers. Methods We employed a tissue phantom using fixed mouse trigeminal nerves coated with various amounts of agarose gel to mimic crossing fibers in the presence of vasogenic edema. Diffusivity measures derived by DTI and diffusion basis spectrum imaging (DBSI) were compared at increasing levels of simulated edema and degrees of fiber crossing. Further, we assessed the ability of DBSI, diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI), generalized q-sampling imaging (GQI), q-ball imaging (QBI), and neurite orientation dispersion and density imaging (NODDI) to resolve fiber crossing, in reference to the gold standard angles measured from structural images. Results DTI-computed diffusivities and fractional anisotropy (FA) were significantly confounded by gelmimicked edema and crossing fibers. Conversely, DBSI calculated accurate diffusivities of individual fibers regardless of the extent of simulated edema and degrees of fiber crossing angles. Additionaly, DBSI accurately and consistently estimated crossing angles in various conditions of gel-mimicked edema when comparing with gold standard (r2=0.92, p=1.9×10-9, bias=3.9°). Small crossing angles and edema sinficantly impact dODF, making DKI, GQI and QBI less accurate in detecting and estimating fibers corrsing angles. Lastly, we demonstrate DBSI’s superiority over DTI for recovering and delineating white matter tracts in peritumoral edema for preoperative planning of surgical resection. Conclusions DBSI is able to separate two crossing fibers and accurately recover their diffusivities in a complex environment characterized by increasing crossing angles and amounts of gel-mimicked edema. DBSI also indicated better angular resolution capability compared with DKI, QBI and GQI.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The impact of edema and fiber crossing on diffusion MRI metrics assessed in an ex vivo nerve phantom: Multi-tensor model vs. diffusion orientation distribution function
    (Wiley, 2021) Ye, Zezhong; Gary, Sam E.; Sun, Peng; Mustafi, Sourajit Mitra; Glenn, George Russell; Yeh, Fang-Cheng; Merisaari, Harri; Song, Chunyu; Yang, Ruimeng; Huang, Guo-Shu; Kao, Hung-Wen; Lin, Chien-Yuan; Wu, Yu-Chien; Jensen, Jens H.; Song, Sheng-Kwei; Radiology and Imaging Sciences, School of Medicine
    Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) has been employed for over two decades to noninvasively quantify central nervous system (CNS) diseases/injuries. However, DTI is an inadequate simplification of diffusion modeling in the presence of co-existing inflammation, edema, and crossing nerve fibers. We employed a tissue phantom using fixed mouse trigeminal nerves coated with various amounts of agarose gel to mimic crossing fibers in the presence of vasogenic edema. Diffusivity measures derived by DTI and diffusion basis spectrum imaging (DBSI) were compared at increasing levels of simulated edema and degrees of fiber crossing. Further, we assessed the ability of DBSI, diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI), generalized q-sampling imaging (GQI), q-ball imaging (QBI), and neurite orientation dispersion and density imaging (NODDI) to resolve fiber crossing, in reference to the gold standard angles measured from structural images. DTI-computed diffusivities and fractional anisotropy (FA) were significantly confounded by gel-mimicked edema and crossing fibers. Conversely, DBSI calculated accurate diffusivities of individual fibers regardless of the extent of simulated edema and degrees of fiber crossing angles. Additionally, DBSI accurately and consistently estimated crossing angles in various conditions of gel-mimicked edema when comparing with gold standard (r2=0.92, p=1.9×10−9, bias=3.9°). Small crossing angles and edema significantly impact dODF, making DKI, GQI and QBI less accurate in detecting and estimating fibers crossing angles. Lastly, we used diffusion tensor ellipsoids to demonstrate that DBSI resolves the confounds of edema and crossing fiber in peritumoral edema region from a patient with lung cancer metastasis while DTI failed. In summary, DBSI is able to separate two crossing fibers and accurately recover their diffusivities in a complex environment characterized by increasing crossing angles and amounts of gel-mimicked edema. DBSI also indicated better angular resolution compared with DKI, QBI and GQI.