Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2012 Sep;62(3):1999-2006.
doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.05.031. Epub 2012 May 23.

Validating atlas-guided DOT: a comparison of diffuse optical tomography informed by atlas and subject-specific anatomies

Robert J Cooper  1 , Matteo Caffini, Jay Dubb, Qianqian Fang, Anna Custo, Daisuke Tsuzuki, Bruce Fischl, William Wells 3rd, Ippeita Dan, David A Boas
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Validating atlas-guided DOT: a comparison of diffuse optical tomography informed by atlas and subject-specific anatomies

Robert J Cooper et al. Neuroimage. 2012 Sep.

Abstract

We describe the validation of an anatomical brain atlas approach to the analysis of diffuse optical tomography (DOT). Using MRI data from 32 subjects, we compare the diffuse optical images of simulated cortical activation reconstructed using a registered atlas with those obtained using a subject's true anatomy. The error in localization of the simulated cortical activations when using a registered atlas is due to a combination of imperfect registration, anatomical differences between atlas and subject anatomies and the localization error associated with diffuse optical image reconstruction. When using a subject-specific MRI, any localization error is due to diffuse optical image reconstruction only. In this study we determine that using a registered anatomical brain atlas results in an average localization error of approximately 18 mm in Euclidean space. The corresponding error when the subject's own MRI is employed is 9.1 mm. In general, the cost of using atlas-guided DOT in place of subject-specific MRI-guided DOT is a doubling of the localization error. Our results show that despite this increase in error, reasonable anatomical localization is achievable even in cases where the subject-specific anatomy is unavailable.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The virtual probe layout is shown in 2D (a) and wrapped to the atlas head in (b) and (c). The anchor point Cz is shown as are the 10–20 landmarks. This probe layout includes source-detector separations of 20 mm and 34.6 mm.
Figure 2
Figure 2
The normalized cortical sensitivity of the virtual NIRS probe in three subjects. Areas where the probe is sparse, such as over the lateral frontal lobes, clearly exhibit a reduced sensitivity. Note that all sensitivities below 1 % of the subject maximum are shown in dark blue.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Five simulated activations in their anatomically equivalent locations in three subjects.
Figure 4
Figure 4
A flow diagram illustrating every stage of analysis.
Figure 5
Figure 5
The average error in optode positioning between subject and registered atlas.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Seven activations are shown as simulated in the subject space (a), reconstructed in the subject space (b) and reconstructed in the atlas space (c). Each figure is normalised by its own maximum absorption change.
Figure 7
Figure 7
The three localization error metrics (Euclidean, geodesic and Hausdorff) for atlas-based DOI reconstruction, as a function of cortical position in three subjects. The grey colour indicates no assigned value due to a sparsity of simulated activations in those areas.
Figure 8
Figure 8
The mean localization errors across all 32 subjects for atlas-guided and subject MRI-guided DOI as a function of cortical position. The grey colour indicates no assigned value due to a sparsity of simulated activations in those areas.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Arridge SR. Optical Tomography in Medical Imaging. Inverse Problems. 1999;15:R41–R93.
    1. Austin T, Gibson AP, Branco G, Yusof RM, Arridge SR, Meek JH, Wyatt JS, Delpy DT, Hebden JC. Three dimensional optical imaging of blood volume and oxygenation in the neonatal brain. NeuroImage. 2006;31:1426–1433. - PubMed
    1. Barbour RL, Graber HL, Chang J, Barbour SLS, Koo PC, Aronson R. MRI-Guided Optical Tomography: Prospects and Computation for a New Imaging Method. IEEE Computational Science & Engineering. 1995;2:63–77.
    1. Bluestone A, Abdoulaev G, Schmitz C, Barbour R, Hielscher A. Three-dimensional optical tomography of hemodynamics in the human head. Opt Express. 2001;9:272–286. - PubMed
    1. Boas DA, Chen K, Grebert D, Franceschini MA. Improving the diffuse optical imaging spatial resolution of the cerebral hemodynamic response to brain activation in humans. Opt Lett. 2004;29:1506–1508. - PubMed

Publication types