Choosing the polarity of the phase-encoding direction in diffusion MRI: Does it matter for group analysis?

Notorious for degrading diffusion MRI data quality are so-called susceptibility-induced off-resonance fields, which cause non-linear geometric image deformations. While acquiring additional data to correct for these distortions alleviates the adverse effects of this artifact drastically – e.g., by r...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: M. Kennis, S.J.H. van Rooij, R.S. Kahn, E. Geuze, A. Leemans
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2016-01-01
Series:NeuroImage: Clinical
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213158216300638
id doaj-6d9781f32149458e9c0c058c99afefb6
record_format Article
spelling doaj-6d9781f32149458e9c0c058c99afefb62020-11-24T20:42:03ZengElsevierNeuroImage: Clinical2213-15822016-01-0111C53954710.1016/j.nicl.2016.03.022Choosing the polarity of the phase-encoding direction in diffusion MRI: Does it matter for group analysis?M. Kennis0S.J.H. van Rooij1R.S. Kahn2E. Geuze3A. Leemans4Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, Department of Psychiatry, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The NetherlandsBrain Center Rudolf Magnus, Department of Psychiatry, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The NetherlandsBrain Center Rudolf Magnus, Department of Psychiatry, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The NetherlandsBrain Center Rudolf Magnus, Department of Psychiatry, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The NetherlandsImage Sciences Institute, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The NetherlandsNotorious for degrading diffusion MRI data quality are so-called susceptibility-induced off-resonance fields, which cause non-linear geometric image deformations. While acquiring additional data to correct for these distortions alleviates the adverse effects of this artifact drastically – e.g., by reversing the polarity of the phase-encoding (PE) direction – this strategy is often not an option due to scan time constraints. Especially in a clinical context, where patient comfort and safety are of paramount importance, acquisition specifications are preferred that minimize scan time, typically resulting in data obtained with only one PE direction. In this work, we investigated whether choosing a different polarity of the PE direction would affect the outcome of a specific clinical research study. To address this methodological question, fractional anisotropy (FA) estimates of FreeSurfer brain regions were obtained in civilian and combat controls, remitted posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) patients, and persistent PTSD patients before and after trauma-focused therapy and were compared between diffusion MRI data sets acquired with different polarities of the PE direction (posterior-to-anterior, PA and anterior-to-posterior, AP). Our results demonstrate that regional FA estimates differ on average in the order of 5% between AP and PA PE data. In addition, when comparing FA estimates between different subject groups for specific cingulum subdivisions, the conclusions for AP and PA PE data were not in agreement. These findings increase our understanding of how one of the most pronounced data artifacts in diffusion MRI can impact group analyses and should encourage users to be more cautious when interpreting and reporting study outcomes derived from data acquired along a single PE direction.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213158216300638Phase-encoding polarityDiffusion tensor imagingFractional anisotropyEPI distortionsSusceptibility artifactsData qualityGroup analysis
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author M. Kennis
S.J.H. van Rooij
R.S. Kahn
E. Geuze
A. Leemans
spellingShingle M. Kennis
S.J.H. van Rooij
R.S. Kahn
E. Geuze
A. Leemans
Choosing the polarity of the phase-encoding direction in diffusion MRI: Does it matter for group analysis?
NeuroImage: Clinical
Phase-encoding polarity
Diffusion tensor imaging
Fractional anisotropy
EPI distortions
Susceptibility artifacts
Data quality
Group analysis
author_facet M. Kennis
S.J.H. van Rooij
R.S. Kahn
E. Geuze
A. Leemans
author_sort M. Kennis
title Choosing the polarity of the phase-encoding direction in diffusion MRI: Does it matter for group analysis?
title_short Choosing the polarity of the phase-encoding direction in diffusion MRI: Does it matter for group analysis?
title_full Choosing the polarity of the phase-encoding direction in diffusion MRI: Does it matter for group analysis?
title_fullStr Choosing the polarity of the phase-encoding direction in diffusion MRI: Does it matter for group analysis?
title_full_unstemmed Choosing the polarity of the phase-encoding direction in diffusion MRI: Does it matter for group analysis?
title_sort choosing the polarity of the phase-encoding direction in diffusion mri: does it matter for group analysis?
publisher Elsevier
series NeuroImage: Clinical
issn 2213-1582
publishDate 2016-01-01
description Notorious for degrading diffusion MRI data quality are so-called susceptibility-induced off-resonance fields, which cause non-linear geometric image deformations. While acquiring additional data to correct for these distortions alleviates the adverse effects of this artifact drastically – e.g., by reversing the polarity of the phase-encoding (PE) direction – this strategy is often not an option due to scan time constraints. Especially in a clinical context, where patient comfort and safety are of paramount importance, acquisition specifications are preferred that minimize scan time, typically resulting in data obtained with only one PE direction. In this work, we investigated whether choosing a different polarity of the PE direction would affect the outcome of a specific clinical research study. To address this methodological question, fractional anisotropy (FA) estimates of FreeSurfer brain regions were obtained in civilian and combat controls, remitted posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) patients, and persistent PTSD patients before and after trauma-focused therapy and were compared between diffusion MRI data sets acquired with different polarities of the PE direction (posterior-to-anterior, PA and anterior-to-posterior, AP). Our results demonstrate that regional FA estimates differ on average in the order of 5% between AP and PA PE data. In addition, when comparing FA estimates between different subject groups for specific cingulum subdivisions, the conclusions for AP and PA PE data were not in agreement. These findings increase our understanding of how one of the most pronounced data artifacts in diffusion MRI can impact group analyses and should encourage users to be more cautious when interpreting and reporting study outcomes derived from data acquired along a single PE direction.
topic Phase-encoding polarity
Diffusion tensor imaging
Fractional anisotropy
EPI distortions
Susceptibility artifacts
Data quality
Group analysis
url http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213158216300638
work_keys_str_mv AT mkennis choosingthepolarityofthephaseencodingdirectionindiffusionmridoesitmatterforgroupanalysis
AT sjhvanrooij choosingthepolarityofthephaseencodingdirectionindiffusionmridoesitmatterforgroupanalysis
AT rskahn choosingthepolarityofthephaseencodingdirectionindiffusionmridoesitmatterforgroupanalysis
AT egeuze choosingthepolarityofthephaseencodingdirectionindiffusionmridoesitmatterforgroupanalysis
AT aleemans choosingthepolarityofthephaseencodingdirectionindiffusionmridoesitmatterforgroupanalysis
_version_ 1716823395114418176