4.7 Article

Quantitative evaluation of 10 tractography algorithms on a realistic diffusion MR phantom

期刊

NEUROIMAGE
卷 56, 期 1, 页码 220-234

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.01.032

关键词

-

资金

  1. LCOGN Lab, NeuroSpin Centre

向作者/读者索取更多资源

As it provides the only method for mapping white matter fibers in vivo, diffusion MRI tractography is gaining importance in clinical and neuroscience research. However, despite the increasing availability of different diffusion models and tractography algorithms, it remains unclear how to select the optimal fiber reconstruction method, given certain imaging parameters. Consequently, it is of utmost importance to have a quantitative comparison of these models and algorithms and a deeper understanding of the corresponding strengths and weaknesses. In this work, we use a common dataset with known ground truth and a reproducible methodology to quantitatively evaluate the performance of various diffusion models and tractography algorithms. To examine a wide range of methods, the dataset, but not the ground truth, was released to the public for evaluation in a contest, the Fiber Cup. 10 fiber reconstruction methods were evaluated. The results provide evidence that: 1. For high SNR datasets, diffusion models such as (fiber) orientation distribution functions correctly model the underlying fiber distribution and can be used in conjunction with streamline tractography, and 2. For medium or low SNR datasets, a prior on the spatial smoothness of either the diffusion model or the fibers is recommended for correct modelling of the fiber distribution and proper tractography results. The phantom dataset, the ground truth fibers, the evaluation methodology and the results obtained so far will remain publicly available on: http://www.lnao.fr/spip.php? rubrique79 to serve as a comparison basis for existing or new tractography methods. New results can be submitted to fibercup09@gmail.com and updates will be published on the webpage. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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