4.7 Article

DT-MRI fiber tracking: A shortest paths approach

期刊

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MEDICAL IMAGING
卷 27, 期 10, 页码 1458-1471

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TMI.2008.923644

关键词

all-paths tracking; diffusion tensor imaging (DTI); diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI); dynamic programming; fiber tracking; fiber trajectory; maximum probability path; magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); optimal path; shortest path; single-path tracking; tractography; white matter

资金

  1. Australian Research Council (ARC)
  2. CASS Foundation
  3. Australian Academy of Science

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We derive a new fiber tracking algorithm for DT-MRI that parts with the locally greedy paradigm intrinsic to conventional tracking algorithms. We demonstrate the ability to precisely reconstruct a diverse range of fiber trajectories in authentic and computer-generated DT-MRI data, for which well-known conventional tracking algorithms are shown to fail. Our approach is to pose fiber tracking as a problem in computing shortest paths in a weighted digraph. Voxels serve as vertices, and edges are included between neighboring voxels. We assign probabilities (weights) to edges using a Bayesian framework. Higher probabilities are assigned to edges that are aligned with fiber trajectories in their close proximity. We compute optimal paths of maximum probability using computationally scalable shortest path algorithms. The salient features of our approach are: global optimality-unlike conventional tracking algorithms, local errors do not accumulate and one wrong-turn does not spell disaster; a target point is specified a priori; precise reconstruction is demonstrated for extremely low signal-to-noise ratio; impartiality to which of two endpoints is used as a seed; and, faster computation times than conventional all-paths tracking. We can use our new tracking algorithm in either a single-path tracking mode (deterministic tracking) or an all-paths tracking mode (probabilistic tracking).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据