hide
Free keywords:
Magnetic resonance imaging; Morphometry; Volumetry; Sensitivity
Abstract:
Morphometry offers new approaches for
in vivo characterization of many neurolog-
ic and psychiatric pathologies. A survey
of recent publications only hints at the at-
tractiveness of magnetic resonance-based
morphometry: published findings are het-
erogeneous, partly contradictory, and not
always plausible in terms of known neu-
ropathologic correlates. Hence, the sensitiv-
ity of the applied methods should be ques-
tioned. Three parameters affect the vari-
ance in morphometric findings: (1) knowl-
edge about normal morphologic variabil-
ity, (2) confounding physiologic parame-
ters, and (3) methodologic misuse. Sound
knowledge about the morphologic variabil-
ity of the normal brain is vital for the assess-
ment of volumetric findings. Large morpho-
logic variability may also interfere with the
precision of morphometric methods. The
multitude of possible confounding physio-
logic parameters raises the necessity of pre-
cise subject control. Magnetic resonance
scanning artefacts require rigid protocols,
and application of the rather complex and
sensitive methods demands profound in-
sight into the techniques.
