Smoothing that does not blur: Effects of the anisotropic approach for 
evaluating diffusion tensor imaging data in the clinic

Moraschi, M; Hagberg, GE; Di Paolo, M; Spalletta, G; Maraviglia, B; Giove, F

doi:10.1002/jmri.22040

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Add to Basket

Local TagsRelease HistoryDetailsSummary

Released

Journal Article

Smoothing that does not blur: Effects of the anisotropic approach for evaluating diffusion tensor imaging data in the clinic

MPS-Authors

There are no MPG-Authors in the publication available

External Resource

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jmri.22040
(Publisher version)

Fulltext (restricted access)

There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.

Fulltext (public)

There are no public fulltexts stored in PuRe

Supplementary Material (public)

There is no public supplementary material available

Citation

Moraschi, M., Hagberg, G., Di Paolo, M., Spalletta, G., Maraviglia, B., & Giove, F. (2010). Smoothing that does not blur: Effects of the anisotropic approach for evaluating diffusion tensor imaging data in the clinic. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 31(1), 690-697. doi:10.1002/jmri.22040.

Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-000A-06F9-7

Abstract

Purpose:

To compare the effects of anisotropic and Gaussian smoothing on the outcomes of diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) voxel-based (VB) analyses in the clinic, in terms of signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) enhancement and directional information and boundary structures preservation.
Materials and Methods:

DTI data of 30 Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients and 30 matched control subjects were obtained at 3T. Fractional anisotropy (FA) maps with variable degrees and quality (Gaussian and anisotropic) of smoothing were created and compared with an unsmoothed dataset. The two smoothing approaches were evaluated in terms of SNR improvements, capability to separate differential effects between patients and controls by a standard VB analysis, and level of artifacts introduced by the preprocessing.
Results:

Gaussian smoothing regionally biased the FA values and introduced a high variability of results in clinical analysis, greatly dependent on the kernel size. On the contrary, anisotropic smoothing proved itself capable of enhancing the SNR of images and maintaining boundary structures, with only moderate dependence of results on smoothing parameters.
Conclusion:

Our study suggests that anisotropic smoothing is more suitable in DTI studies; however, regardless of technique, a moderate level of smoothing seems to be preferable considering the artifacts introduced by this manipulation.