We introduce a novel method of prospectively compensating for subject motion in neuroanatomical imaging. Short three-dimensional echo-planar imaging volumetric navigators are embedded in a long three-dimensional sequence, and the resulting image volumes are registered to provide an estimate of the subject's location in the scanner at a cost of less than 500 ms, ~ 1% change in contrast, and ~3% change in intensity. This time fits well into the existing gaps in sequences routinely used for neuroimaging, thus giving a motion-corrected sequence with no extra time required. We also demonstrate motion-driven selective reacquisition of k-space to further compensate for subject motion. We perform multiple validation experiments to evaluate accuracy, navigator impact on tissue intensity/contrast, and the improvement in final output. The complete system operates without adding additional hardware to the scanner and requires no external calibration, making it suitable for high-throughput environments.
"i - shot , segmented EPI to motion and B 0 changes across segments include direct alignment of phase between segments in post - processing , although typically these methods require extra information or additional scans [ Hoge et al . , 2010 ; Chen et al . , 2013 ] . Bulk , rigid head motion could potentially be addressed by either image - based [ Tisdall et al . , 2012 ] or external sensor - based [ Zaitsev et al . , 2006 ; Schulz et al . , 2012 ] motion tracking along with either real - time feedback to the gradient system or a model for how the motion impacts the information acquired across the multiple , interleaved segments . However , independent motion ( e . g . , of the eyes ) during ACS acquis"
"A Multi-Echo MPRAGE (MEMPR) with motion correction, developed at the Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH, Boston), was employed [70,71]. This sequence has the advantage of combining the properties of the classical MPRAGE sequence, which has high contrast aiding cortical segmentation, with Multi-Echo FLASH, which improves segmentation of subcortical regions. "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Background:
The Whitehall II (WHII) study of British civil servants provides a unique source of longitudinal data to investigate key factors hypothesized to affect brain health and cognitive ageing. This paper introduces the multi-modal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) protocol and cognitive assessment designed to investigate brain health in a random sample of 800 members of the WHII study.
A total of 6035 civil servants participated in the WHII Phase 11 clinical examination in 2012-2013. A random sample of these participants was included in a sub-study comprising an MRI brain scan, a detailed clinical and cognitive assessment, and collection of blood and buccal mucosal samples for the characterisation of immune function and associated measures. Data collection for this sub-study started in 2012 and will be completed by 2016. The participants, for whom social and health records have been collected since 1985, were between 60-85 years of age at the time the MRI study started. Here, we describe the pre-specified clinical and cognitive assessment protocols, the state-of-the-art MRI sequences and latest pipelines for analyses of this sub-study.
The integration of cutting-edge MRI techniques, clinical and cognitive tests in combination with retrospective data on social, behavioural and biological variables during the preceding 25 years from a well-established longitudinal epidemiological study (WHII cohort) will provide a unique opportunity to examine brain structure and function in relation to age-related diseases and the modifiable and non-modifiable factors affecting resilience against and vulnerability to adverse brain changes.
"fMRI scanning took place at the Athinoula A. Martinos Imaging Center at McGovern Institute for Brain Research at MIT. Imaging was performed using a Siemens 3T MAGNETOM Trio, A Tim System (Siemens Medical Solutions, Erlangen, Germany), and a commercial Siemens 32 channel head coil. High-resolution structural whole-brain images were acquired using a T1-weighted anatomical scan with motion correction (176 slices per slab; 1 mm isotropic voxel size; TR = 2530 ms; TE = 1.64 ms) . "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Children often make letter reversal errors when first learning to read and write, even for letters whose reversed forms do not appear in normal print. However, the brain basis of such letter reversal in children learning to read is unknown. The present study compared the neuroanatomical correlates (via functional magnetic resonance imaging) and the electrophysiological correlates (via event-related potentials or ERPs) of this phenomenon in children, ages 5-12, relative to young adults. When viewing reversed letters relative to typically oriented letters, adults exhibited widespread occipital, parietal, and temporal lobe activations, including activation in the functionally localized visual word form area (VWFA) in left occipito-temporal cortex. Adults exhibited significantly greater activation than children in all of these regions; children only exhibited such activation in a limited frontal region. Similarly, on the P1 and N170 ERP components, adults exhibited significantly greater differences between typical and reversed letters than children, who failed to exhibit significant differences between typical and reversed letters. These findings indicate that adults distinguish typical and reversed letters in the early stages of specialized brain processing of print, but that children do not recognize this distinction during the early stages of processing. Specialized brain processes responsible for early stages of letter perception that distinguish between typical and reversed letters may develop slowly and remain immature even in older children who no longer produce letter reversals in their writing.
PLoS ONE 05/2014; 9(5):e98386. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0098386 · 3.23 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.