Paul Taylor1, Justin Rajendra1, Amritha Nayak2,3, M. Okan Irfanoglu2, Daniel R Glen1, and Richard C Reynolds1
1NIMH, NIH, Bethesda, MD, United States, 2NIBIB, NIH, Bethesda, MD, United States, 3Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Bethesda, MD, United States
Synopsis
The
typical size of MRI data sets being processed for a study is rapidly
increasing, particularly with the growth of publicly available data
sets and “big data” strategies for approaching problems. This
produces a dual need in analysis: having scriptable and reproducible
pipelines for analysis, as well as having a method for visualizing
data both during intermediate steps and for final results
presentation.
Here,
we describe new AFNI-FATCAT tools that provides a succinct set
of processing steps for a full DTI analysis pipeline, from DICOM
conversion to tractography and statistical anlyses; these tools create QC images and quantitative checks at each step for pipeline evaluation.
Introduction
The
typical size of MRI data sets being processed for a study is rapidly
increasing, particularly with the growth of publicly available data
sets and “big data” strategies for approaching problems. This
produces a dual need in analysis: having scriptable and reproducible
pipelines for analysis, as well as having a method for visualizing
data both during intermediate steps and for final results
presentation.
Here,
we describe new AFNI-FATCAT [1-2] tools that provides a succinct set
of processing steps for a full DTI analysis pipeline, from DICOM
conversion to tractography and statistical analyses. These tools
integrate with other scriptable tools, such as MRIcron-dcm2nii,
TORTOISE and FreeSurfer [3-5]. In each step, quality control (QC)
images are automatically created and saved, so that users may easily
check intermediate steps in a systematic fashion, even across large
groups. Additionally, quantitative evaluations such as outlier
counts and parameter distributions are also created.Methods and Results
A
schematic of the full pipeline is shown in Fig. 1, starting from a
DWI acquisition, a T1w anatomical (for FreeSurfer processing) and a
T2w anatomical (used by TORTOISE as a reference for DWI distortion
correction). A-C) DICOM files are converted to NIFTIs and
anonymized, as well as given consistent orientations and coordinate
origins at each volume’s center of mass (aiding alignment
processes). D-E) users can visualize the converted DWIs and easily
select a list of volumes+gradients for removal (e.g., volumes with
distortion or signal dropout), as in Fig. 2; when dual phase encoded
DWI sets are acquired, users can build a single list to remove
volumes+gradients from both sets, to maintain matching volumes. F)
Users can quantitatively check that gradient coverage is not overly
sparse after removal, and check for outliers of gradient removal
within groups of subjects.
G)
The major planes of the T2w reference can be aligned with the volume
axes (without warping), similar to AC-PC alignment, via reference to
a standard template brain; this assists interpreting structures with
RGB encoding. H) The T1w can be aligned with the T2w, simplifying
later ROI mapping; the quality of alignment is quickly judged
through two QC images created: an “edgified” comparison of the
aligned volumes is saved, as well as a translucent overlay image
(Fig. 3A). I-J) FreeSurfer is run and its output converted to
AFNI+SUMA formats, with individual maps of tissue types generated.
K) DWI distortion corrections are made consistently using TORTOISE
tools; QC images displaying the quality of distortion correction are
automatically created when AFNI and TORTOISE are both present on the user's
computer.
L-N)
The consistency of gradient notation is checked and the DWIs
converted to diffusion tensors (DTs) and parameters; QC images for
goodness-of-fit measures and FA-defined white matter (WM) maps are
automatically generated (Fig. 3B), and RGB-encoded directionally encoded maps can also
be calculated. O) The segmented gray matter (GM) from FreeSurfer is
transformed into DWI space (and each region can undergo controlled
inflation to reduce regridding effects), with QC images of the ROI
maps created (Fig. 3C); surfaces and associated specification files
are also transformed.
P)
Then, tractography can be run among the full GM target map or any
subset, determining the likeliest locations of WM associated with
each GM pair; matrices of structural properties of each WM connection
are automatically generated. Q-S) The tracts and matrices of
properties within tracked regions can be viewed in several ways.
AFNI and SUMA can be used to visualize data in 2D and 3D
simultaneously. Images of the the matrices of WM connection
properties can be created from the command line, or visualized
interactively with FATCAT_matplot (Fig. 4A), which also allows the
user to rearrange matrices and form dendrograms (Fig. 4B) and
circos-type plots (Fig. 4C). T) These matrices can also be used for
statistical modeling with multivariate methods, using AFNI’s 3dMVM
[6,7].
Conclusions
This
set of programs within AFNI-FATCAT provides a flexible platform for
combining several types of data (additionally, FMRI-derived GM maps
could also be used for making tractography targets). In each step,
having automatically generated QC images assists the researcher in
checking the analysis in a systematic fashion, as well as providing a
mechanism for sharing and describing the results with colleagues.
These tools will aid researchers in creating their pipeline for
analyses, and for verifying their output as they process, increasing
their reproducibility and repeatability.Acknowledgements
No acknowledgement found.References
1.
Cox RW. 1996. AFNI: software for analysis and visualization of
functional
magnetic resonance neuroimages. Comput Biomed Res
29:162-173.
2.
Taylor PA, Saad ZS. 2013. FATCAT: (an efficient) functional
and
tractographic connectivity analysis toolbox. Brain Con-
nect
3:523–535.
3.
Rorden, C., Brett, M. (2000). Stereotaxic display of brain lesions.
Behavioural
Neurology. 12, 191-200.
4.
Pierpaoli C, Walker L, Irfanoglu MO, Barnett A, Basser P,
Chang
L-C, Koay C, Pajevic S, Rohde G, Sarlls J, Wu M.
TORTOISE:
An Integrated Software Package for Processing
of
Diffusion MRI Data. In ISMRM 18th Annual Meeting,
Stockholm,
Sweden, 2010, p. 1597.
5.
Fischl B, Salat DH, Busa E, Albert M, Dieterich M, Haselgrove C,
van
der Kouwe A, Killiany R, Kennedy D, Klaveness S, Montillo A,
Makris
N, Rosen B, Dale AM. 2002. Whole brain segmentation:
automated
labeling of neuroanatomical structures in the human
brain.
Neuron 33:341–355.
6.
Taylor PA, Gang C, Cox RW, Saad ZS. 2016. Open Environment for
Multimodal
Interactive Connectivity Visualization and
Analysis.
Brain Connectivity
6(2):109-21.
7.
Chen G, Saad ZS, Adleman NE, Leibenluft E, Cox RW. 2015. Detecting
the subtle shape differences in hemodynamic responses at the group
level. Front. Neurosci. 9:375.