European Radiology

, Volume 28, Issue 10, pp 4314–4323 | Cite as

Minimisation of Signal Intensity Differences in Distortion Correction Approaches of Brain Magnetic Resonance Diffusion Tensor Imaging

  • Dong-Hoon Lee
  • Do-Wan Lee
  • David Henry
  • Hae-Jin Park
  • Bong-Soo Han
  • Dong-Cheol Woo



To evaluate the effects of signal intensity differences between the b0 image and diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) in the image registration process.


To correct signal intensity differences between the b0 image and DTI data, a simple image intensity compensation (SIMIC) method, which is a b0 image re-calculation process from DTI data, was applied before the image registration. The re-calculated b0 image (b0ext) from each diffusion direction was registered to the b0 image acquired through the MR scanning (b0nd) with two types of cost functions and their transformation matrices were acquired. These transformation matrices were then used to register the DTI data. For quantifications, the dice similarity coefficient (DSC) values, diffusion scalar matrix, and quantified fibre numbers and lengths were calculated.


The combined SIMIC method with two cost functions showed the highest DSC value (0.802 ± 0.007). Regarding diffusion scalar values and numbers and lengths of fibres from the corpus callosum, superior longitudinal fasciculus, and cortico-spinal tract, only using normalised cross correlation (NCC) showed a specific tendency toward lower values in the brain regions.


Image-based distortion correction with SIMIC for DTI data would help in image analysis by accounting for signal intensity differences as one additional option for DTI analysis.

Key points

We evaluated the effects of signal intensity differences at DTI registration.

The non-diffusion-weighted image re-calculation process from DTI data was applied.

SIMIC can minimise the signal intensity differences at DTI registration.


Diffusion tensor imaging Diffusion tractography Corpus callosum Cortico-spinal tract Diagnostic imaging 



Corpus callosum


Cortico-spinal tract


Dice similarity coefficient


Diffusion tensor imaging


Echo planar imaging


Fractional anisotropy


Fibre assignment with the continuous tracking


Normalised mutual information


Normalised cross correlation


Relative anisotropy


Radial diffusivity


Region of interest


Simple image intensity compensation


Superior longitudinal fasciculus


Structural similarity


Volume ratio



This study was supported by grants of Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea funded by the Ministry of Education [NRF ( NRF- 2017R1A6A3A03012461 and NRF-2015R1C1A1A02036526] and the Korea Health Technology R&D Project through the Korea Health Industry Development Institute [KHIDI ( HI14C1090], funded by the Ministry of Health & Welfare, Republic of Korea. This study was also supported by the 2017 University of Sydney Postdoctoral Fellowship Scheme (192237).

Compliance with ethical standards


The scientific guarantor of this publication is Dr. Dong-Hoon Lee.

Conflict of interest

The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.

Statistics and biometry

No complex statistical methods were necessary for this paper.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was obtained from all subjects (patients) in this study.

Ethical approval

Institutional Review Board approval was obtained.


• retrospective

• experimental

• performed at one institution


  1. 1.
    Alexander AL, Lee JE, Lazar M, Field AS (2007) Diffusion tensor imaging of the brain. Neurotherapeutics 4:316–329CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lee DH, Lee DW, Han BS (2016) Topographic organization of motor fibre tracts in the human brain: findings in multiple locations using magnetic resonance diffusion tensor tractography. European Radiology 26:1751–1759CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wakana S, Jiang HY, Nagae-Poetscher LM, van Zijl PCM, Mori S (2004) Fiber tract-based atlas of human white matter anatomy. Radiology 230:77–87CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wu WT, Rigolo L, O'Donnell LJ, Norton I, Shriver S, Golby AJ (2012) Visual pathway study using in vivo diffusion tensor imaging tractography to complement classic anatomy. Neurosurgery 70Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kreilkamp BAK, Zaca D, Papinutto N, Jovicich J (2016) Retrospective head motion correction approaches for diffusion tensor imaging: effects of preprocessing choices on biases and reproducibility of scalar diffusion metrics. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging 43:99–106CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mohammadi S, Moller HE, Kugel H, Muller DK, Deppe M (2010) Correcting eddy current and motion effects by affine whole-brain registrations: evaluation of three-dimensional distortions and comparison with slicewise correction. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 64:1047–1056CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lee DH, Lee DW, Han BS (2015) Simple image intensity compensation (SIMIC) method prior to application of distortion correction algorithms in brain diffusion tensor magnetic resonance imaging: Validation test for two cost functions of distortion correction algorithms. International Journal of Imaging Systems and Technology 25:328–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Danielian LE, Iwata NK, Thomasson DM, Floeter MK (2010) Reliability of fiber tracking measurements in diffusion tensor imaging for longitudinal study. Neuroimage 49:1572–1580CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Smith SM (2002) Fast robust automated brain extraction. Human Brain Mapping 17:143–155CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jiang HY, van Zijl PCM, Kim J, Pearlson GD, Mori S (2006) DtiStudio: Resource program for diffusion tensor computation and fiber bundle tracking. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine 81:106–116CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kamali A, Flanders AE, Brody J, Hunter JV, Hasan KM (2014) Tracing superior longitudinal fasciculus connectivity in the human brain using high resolution diffusion tensor tractography. Brain Structure & Function 219:269–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rajagopalan V, Pioro EP (2017) Differential involvement of corticospinal tract (CST) fibers in UMN-predominant ALS patients with or without CST hyperintensity: A diffusion tensor tractography study. Neuroimage-Clinical 14:574–579CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Oguro S, Tokuda J, Elhawary H et al (2009) MRI signal intensity based B-spline nonrigid registration for pre- and intraoperative imaging during prostate brachytherapy. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging 30:1052–1058CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zou KH, Warfield SK, Bharatha A et al (2004) Statistical validation of image segmentation quality based on a spatial overlap index - Scientific reports. Academic Radiology 11:178–189CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Alterovitz R, Goldberg K, Pouliot J et al (2006) Registration of MR prostate images with biomechanical modeling and nonlinear parameter estimation. Medical Physics 33:446–454CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dice LR (1945) Measures of the amount of ecologic association between species. Ecology 26:297–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rohde GK, Barnett AS, Basser PJ, Marenco S, Pierpaoli C (2004) Comprehensive approach for correction of motion and distortion in diffusion-weighted MRI. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 51:103–114CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Taylor PA, Alhamud A, van der Kouwe A, Saleh MG, Laughton B, Meintjes E (2016) Assessing the performance of different DTI motion correction strategies in the presence of EPI distortion correction. Human Brain Mapping 37:4405–4424CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bastin ME (1999) Correction of eddy current-induced artefacts in diffusion tensor imaging using iterative cross-correlation. Magnetic Resonance Imaging 17:1011–1024CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Haselgrove JC, Moore JR (1996) Correction for distortion of echo-planar images used to calculate the apparent diffusion coefficient. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 36:960–964CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Horsfield MA (1999) Mapping eddy current induced fields for the correction of diffusion-weighted echo planar images. Magnetic Resonance Imaging 17:1335–1345CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Damon BM, Froeling M, Buck AK et al (2017) Skeletal muscle diffusion tensor-MRI fiber tracking: rationale, data acquisition and analysis methods, applications and future directions. NMR Biomed 30Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Schlaffke L, Rehmann R, Froeling M et al (2017) Diffusion tensor imaging of the human calf: Variation of inter- and intramuscle-specific diffusion parameters. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging.
  24. 24.
    Toktas ZO, Tanrikulu B, Koban O, Kilic T, Konya D (2016) Diffusion tensor imaging of cervical spinal cord: A quantitative diagnostic tool in cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Craniovertebr Junction Spine 7:26–30CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Radiology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Health Sciences and Brain & Mind CentreThe University of SydneySydneyAustralia
  2. 2.Center for Bioimaging of New Drug Development, and MR Core Lab., Asan Institute for Life SciencesAsan Medical CenterSeoulRepublic of Korea
  3. 3.Department of Radiation OncologyAjou University School of MedicineSuwonRepublic of Korea
  4. 4.Department of Radiological Science, College of Health ScienceYonsei UniversityWonjuRepublic of Korea
  5. 5.Department of Convergence Medicine, Asan Medical CenterUniversity of Ulsan College of MedicineSeoulRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations