2009
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.22003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Adaptive non‐local means denoising of MR images with spatially varying noise levels

Abstract: Purpose: To adapt the so-called nonlocal means filter to deal with magnetic resonance (MR) images with spatially varying noise levels (for both Gaussian and Rician distributed noise). Materials and Methods:Most filtering techniques assume an equal noise distribution across the image. When this assumption is not met, the resulting filtering becomes suboptimal. This is the case of MR images with spatially varying noise levels, such as those obtained by parallel imaging (sensitivity-encoded), intensity inhomogene… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
714
0
4

Year Published

2013
2013
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 949 publications
(718 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
714
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…The realigned, bias corrected images were then tissue‐classified into GM, WM, and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and registered to Montreal Neurological Institute (MNI) space through linear and nonlinear transformations (Ashburner, 2007; Kurth et al., 2014; Luders et al., 2009) (see http://dbm.neuro.uni-jena.de/vbm8/VBM8-Manual.pdf). More specifically, the tissue classification was based on maximum a posteriori segmentations (Rajapakse, Giedd, & Rapoport, 1997), accounted for partial volume effects (Tohka, Zijdenbos, & Evans, 2004), and was refined by applying a spatially adaptive nonlocal means denoising filter (Manjon, Coupe, Marti‐Bonmati, Collins, & Robles, 2010) as well as a hidden Markov random field model (Cuadra, Cammoun, Butz, Cuisenaire, & Thiran, 2005). These methods made the tissue classification independent of tissue probability maps and thus additionally minimized the influence of misclassifications, lesions, and altered geometry (Ceccarelli et al., 2012).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The realigned, bias corrected images were then tissue‐classified into GM, WM, and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and registered to Montreal Neurological Institute (MNI) space through linear and nonlinear transformations (Ashburner, 2007; Kurth et al., 2014; Luders et al., 2009) (see http://dbm.neuro.uni-jena.de/vbm8/VBM8-Manual.pdf). More specifically, the tissue classification was based on maximum a posteriori segmentations (Rajapakse, Giedd, & Rapoport, 1997), accounted for partial volume effects (Tohka, Zijdenbos, & Evans, 2004), and was refined by applying a spatially adaptive nonlocal means denoising filter (Manjon, Coupe, Marti‐Bonmati, Collins, & Robles, 2010) as well as a hidden Markov random field model (Cuadra, Cammoun, Butz, Cuisenaire, & Thiran, 2005). These methods made the tissue classification independent of tissue probability maps and thus additionally minimized the influence of misclassifications, lesions, and altered geometry (Ceccarelli et al., 2012).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…During normalization, images were interpolated to isotropic 1 3 1 3 1 mm voxels. The VBM8-toolbox extends this model with a partial volume estimation to account for partial volume effects and the application of a spatially adaptive non-local means (SANLM) filter 47 for bias correction. Normalization to stereotactic space consisted of a linear affine registration and a linear deformation corresponding to a high-dimensional DARTEL normalization 48 implemented in VBM8.…”
Section: Article Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One approach that has been successfully used in the past for correcting the noise underestimation at low SNR areas is based on the iterative analytical correction scheme proposed by Koay and Basser (2006). This approach was used for stationary noise estimation in MRI (Coupe et al, 2010;Manjón et al, 2010).…”
Section: Rician Noise Estimationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In MRI, early works using the NLM method are from Coupe et al (2008) and Manjón et al (2008). The bibliography related to this method is quite extensive (Tristan-Vega et al, 20012;Coupe et al, 2012;Manjón et al, 2009Manjón et al, , 2010Manjón et al, , 2012Wiest-Daesslé et al, 2008;He and Greenshields, 2009;Rajan et al 2012Rajan et al , 2014.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%