calibration wg projects published qa analysis friedman l; glover gh. report on a multicenter fmri...
DESCRIPTION
Calibration WG Projects eliminated SM None of the areas were deemed reliable, esp. for Sz.TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Calibration WG Projects published QA Analysis Friedman L; Glover GH. Report on a multicenter fMRI quality assurance protocol. JMRI 23:827-839 (2006). Smoothness](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062412/5a4d1ae17f8b9ab059977468/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Calibration WG
Projects published
• QA Analysis Friedman L; Glover GH. Report on a multicenter fMRI quality assurance protocol. JMRI 23:827-839 (2006).
• Smoothness equalizationFriedman L; Glover GH; Kranz D; Magnotta V; FIRST BIRN. Reducing Scanner-to-Scanner Variability of Activation in a Multi-center fMRI Study: Role of Smoothness Equalization. NeuroImage 32:1656-68 (2006).
![Page 2: Calibration WG Projects published QA Analysis Friedman L; Glover GH. Report on a multicenter fMRI quality assurance protocol. JMRI 23:827-839 (2006). Smoothness](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062412/5a4d1ae17f8b9ab059977468/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Calibration WG
Projects published
• BH Thomason ME; Burrows BE; Gabrieli JDE; Glover GH. Breath holding reveals differences in fMRI BOLD signal in children and adults. NeuroImage 25:824-837 (2005).
Thomason ME; Foland LC; Glover GH. Calibration of BOLD fMRI using Breath-holding reduces group variance during a cognitive task. Human Brain Mapping (Epub May 2006).
![Page 3: Calibration WG Projects published QA Analysis Friedman L; Glover GH. Report on a multicenter fMRI quality assurance protocol. JMRI 23:827-839 (2006). Smoothness](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062412/5a4d1ae17f8b9ab059977468/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Calibration WG
Projects eliminated
• SM None of the areas were deemed reliable,esp. for Sz.
![Page 4: Calibration WG Projects published QA Analysis Friedman L; Glover GH. Report on a multicenter fMRI quality assurance protocol. JMRI 23:827-839 (2006). Smoothness](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062412/5a4d1ae17f8b9ab059977468/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Calibration WG
Projects underway
• Perfusion measurement• BH calib• Coil comparison- Multichannel vs. single channel
![Page 5: Calibration WG Projects published QA Analysis Friedman L; Glover GH. Report on a multicenter fMRI quality assurance protocol. JMRI 23:827-839 (2006). Smoothness](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062412/5a4d1ae17f8b9ab059977468/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Calibration WG
Projects underway
• Perfusion measurement• BH calib• Coil comparison- Multichannel vs. single channel
![Page 6: Calibration WG Projects published QA Analysis Friedman L; Glover GH. Report on a multicenter fMRI quality assurance protocol. JMRI 23:827-839 (2006). Smoothness](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062412/5a4d1ae17f8b9ab059977468/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
No calib
BH Calibration: Individual SubsCalib
5 ≤ t ≤ 20M. Thomason et al. 2006
![Page 7: Calibration WG Projects published QA Analysis Friedman L; Glover GH. Report on a multicenter fMRI quality assurance protocol. JMRI 23:827-839 (2006). Smoothness](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062412/5a4d1ae17f8b9ab059977468/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
No cal Calib
3.5 ≤ t ≤ 10
vol = 1.24 @ p .001 vol = 1.0
BH Calibration: Group Activation
M. Thomason et al. 2006
![Page 8: Calibration WG Projects published QA Analysis Friedman L; Glover GH. Report on a multicenter fMRI quality assurance protocol. JMRI 23:827-839 (2006). Smoothness](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062412/5a4d1ae17f8b9ab059977468/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Calibration: SWM
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
SWM SWM calib
Acti
vati
on v
olum
e
sd: p = 0.05 *vol: ns
5 subjects, parietal
M. Thomason et al. 2006
![Page 9: Calibration WG Projects published QA Analysis Friedman L; Glover GH. Report on a multicenter fMRI quality assurance protocol. JMRI 23:827-839 (2006). Smoothness](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062412/5a4d1ae17f8b9ab059977468/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Control of Inspiration
![Page 10: Calibration WG Projects published QA Analysis Friedman L; Glover GH. Report on a multicenter fMRI quality assurance protocol. JMRI 23:827-839 (2006). Smoothness](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062412/5a4d1ae17f8b9ab059977468/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
no control
BOLD Results
w/control
![Page 11: Calibration WG Projects published QA Analysis Friedman L; Glover GH. Report on a multicenter fMRI quality assurance protocol. JMRI 23:827-839 (2006). Smoothness](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062412/5a4d1ae17f8b9ab059977468/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Residuals across 8 trials
fluctuation
0.000
0.050
0.100
0.150
0.200
0.250
BOLD, fluctuation Psychophysical, std
vari
atio
n/si
gnal
varncc
* (p=0.006)
* (p=0.005)
N = 10 subs
![Page 12: Calibration WG Projects published QA Analysis Friedman L; Glover GH. Report on a multicenter fMRI quality assurance protocol. JMRI 23:827-839 (2006). Smoothness](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062412/5a4d1ae17f8b9ab059977468/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
const cntl
no cntl
Single Subject
![Page 13: Calibration WG Projects published QA Analysis Friedman L; Glover GH. Report on a multicenter fMRI quality assurance protocol. JMRI 23:827-839 (2006). Smoothness](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062412/5a4d1ae17f8b9ab059977468/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
SM
BOLD response in normals: BH & SM
BH
Red: 4 non-smokersBlue: 4 smokers
![Page 14: Calibration WG Projects published QA Analysis Friedman L; Glover GH. Report on a multicenter fMRI quality assurance protocol. JMRI 23:827-839 (2006). Smoothness](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062412/5a4d1ae17f8b9ab059977468/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Calibration WG
Projects underway
• Perfusion measurement• BH calib• Coil comparison- Multichannel vs. single channel
![Page 15: Calibration WG Projects published QA Analysis Friedman L; Glover GH. Report on a multicenter fMRI quality assurance protocol. JMRI 23:827-839 (2006). Smoothness](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062412/5a4d1ae17f8b9ab059977468/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Ratio 8/1
STAN SUB1
200-->
200-->
2.5->
ALL SCALES START AT 0.0
SFNR – CP COIL
SFNR – 8-CHANNEL COIL
COMPARING COILS ON SFNR
UCIR SUB1 UCIR SUB2 MINN SUB1
![Page 16: Calibration WG Projects published QA Analysis Friedman L; Glover GH. Report on a multicenter fMRI quality assurance protocol. JMRI 23:827-839 (2006). Smoothness](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062412/5a4d1ae17f8b9ab059977468/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Ratio 8/1
YALE SUB1 YALE SUB2
200-->
200-->
2.5->
ALL SCALES START AT 0.0
SFNR – CP COIL
SFNR – 8-CHANNEL COIL
COMPARING COILS ON SFNR
YALE SUB3
![Page 17: Calibration WG Projects published QA Analysis Friedman L; Glover GH. Report on a multicenter fMRI quality assurance protocol. JMRI 23:827-839 (2006). Smoothness](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062412/5a4d1ae17f8b9ab059977468/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
UnsmoothedRatio 8/1
YALE SUB1 YALE SUB2
2.5->
ALL SCALES START AT 0.0
COMPARING COILS ON SFNR
YALE SUB3 YALE SUB3
Smoothed10 mm FWHM
Ratio 8/1
2.5->
![Page 18: Calibration WG Projects published QA Analysis Friedman L; Glover GH. Report on a multicenter fMRI quality assurance protocol. JMRI 23:827-839 (2006). Smoothness](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062412/5a4d1ae17f8b9ab059977468/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Conclusions from Resting State Analyses
• 8 channel coil has less percent noise than 1 channel coil when unsmoothed
• Smoothing dramatically reduced noise• Smoothing equalizes noise of the two coils to
a remarkable extent• Little to no advantage to multichannel coils in
SFNR or Percent Noise when data smoothed to conventional levels (FWHM = 7 – 10)
![Page 19: Calibration WG Projects published QA Analysis Friedman L; Glover GH. Report on a multicenter fMRI quality assurance protocol. JMRI 23:827-839 (2006). Smoothness](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062412/5a4d1ae17f8b9ab059977468/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Auditory Oddball Data
• 3 subjects• 2 tasks/per study:
– Auditory Oddball (4 runs, 143 TRs, 286 sec)• FBIRN Phase II sequence, no PACE,
ascending acquisition, TR=2.0, 64x64 matrix, no apodization filter.
![Page 20: Calibration WG Projects published QA Analysis Friedman L; Glover GH. Report on a multicenter fMRI quality assurance protocol. JMRI 23:827-839 (2006). Smoothness](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062412/5a4d1ae17f8b9ab059977468/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Percent Signal ChangeLeft Motor
CortexLeft BA
40Ant.
CingulateLeft BA
22Left BA
41Right BA
47Right
CB
MultiSingle
![Page 21: Calibration WG Projects published QA Analysis Friedman L; Glover GH. Report on a multicenter fMRI quality assurance protocol. JMRI 23:827-839 (2006). Smoothness](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062412/5a4d1ae17f8b9ab059977468/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
1 Channel Coil 8 Channel Coil
T-value maps: t-values are for the 3-6 second time point
T=0.0
T=3.9, p <0.0001
threshold T=2.81p <0.005
![Page 22: Calibration WG Projects published QA Analysis Friedman L; Glover GH. Report on a multicenter fMRI quality assurance protocol. JMRI 23:827-839 (2006). Smoothness](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062412/5a4d1ae17f8b9ab059977468/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Preliminary Conclusion• Some evidence for a Superior-to-inferior gradient in
the relationship between the coils.• At superior levels (left motor cortex, left BA 40) both
Percent Signal Change and CNR (t-values) are elevated in the 8 channel coil
• At inferior level (right cerebellum, BA47), single channel coil is stronger both for Percent Signal Change and CNR.
• At intermediate levels, the coils appear to perform similarly.
![Page 23: Calibration WG Projects published QA Analysis Friedman L; Glover GH. Report on a multicenter fMRI quality assurance protocol. JMRI 23:827-839 (2006). Smoothness](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062412/5a4d1ae17f8b9ab059977468/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Thoughts on WhyThe Answer is Probably Hematocrit
Smoking Increases Hematocrit Hemocrit declines with age.
Hypothesis: Although both BOLD and BHdepend on Hematocrit, BH dependence is much stronger, leading to increased BH response in smokers