2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.neurad.2013.01.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of two nonlinear registration techniques to investigate brain atrophy patterns in normal aging

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Its nonlinear registration and segmentation methods, jointly implemented in a unified framework (Ashburner and Friston 2005;Pohl et al 2005), have been successfully used in numerous investigations (Dewey et al 2010;Colloby et al 2011;Izquierdo-Garcia et al 2014). Several comparative studies have been conducted to examine the accuracy of SPM12 on MR images collected in young individuals (Wilke et al 2002;Klein et al 2009;Han et al 2012;Martino et al 2013;Pu et al 2013), but not yet in elderly populations. There is however a general consensus on the fact that age-related and pathological changes have a negative impact on the performance of the method adopted (Dade et al 2004;Hoeksma et al 2005;Allen et al 2008;Kennedy et al 2009;Peelle et al 2012;Eloyan et al 2014).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Its nonlinear registration and segmentation methods, jointly implemented in a unified framework (Ashburner and Friston 2005;Pohl et al 2005), have been successfully used in numerous investigations (Dewey et al 2010;Colloby et al 2011;Izquierdo-Garcia et al 2014). Several comparative studies have been conducted to examine the accuracy of SPM12 on MR images collected in young individuals (Wilke et al 2002;Klein et al 2009;Han et al 2012;Martino et al 2013;Pu et al 2013), but not yet in elderly populations. There is however a general consensus on the fact that age-related and pathological changes have a negative impact on the performance of the method adopted (Dade et al 2004;Hoeksma et al 2005;Allen et al 2008;Kennedy et al 2009;Peelle et al 2012;Eloyan et al 2014).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, spatial normalization of brain MRI, particularly in the presence of pathological tissue, is significantly challenging due to atypically disrupted anatomy (atrophy) and tissue contrast (partial volume effect). Although the accuracy of the SPM DARTEL was successfully validated to normalize PET and MRI for voxel‐wise analysis , this normalization cannot guarantee perfect registration over the whole brain. In fact, we observed that the deformation was quite accurate at deep structures such as major association tracts, but not as accurate in subcortical, peripheral regions where atrophy and partial volume effect likely exist.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All children had additional native and postcontrast MRI sequences to establish the diagnosis of SWS and to study the extent of brain involvement. Also, all SWS children underwent interictal FDG‐PET scanning using an EXACT/HR PET scanner (CTI/Siemens, Hoffman Estates, IL), which provides simultaneous acquisition of 47 contiguous transaxial images (nominal resolution = 1.76 mm) with slice thickness of 3.13 mm . Intravenous injection of 5.29 MBq/kg of FDG was followed by a 30‐minute uptake period.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%