PDF herunterladen
Neuropediatrics 2012; 43(05): 249-257
DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1324731
Original Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Identification of Successful Clinical fMRI Sessions in Children: An Objective Approach

Andrea Zsoter
1   Department of Pediatric Neurology and Developmental Medicine, University of Tübingen, Children's Hospital, Germany
2   Experimental Pediatric Neuroimaging, Department of Neuroradiology, University of Tübingen, Children's Hospital, Germany
3   Clinic for Neuropediatrics and Neurorehabilitation, Epilepsy Center for Children and Adolescents, Schön Klinik Vogtareuth, Germany
,
Martin Staudt
1   Department of Pediatric Neurology and Developmental Medicine, University of Tübingen, Children's Hospital, Germany
3   Clinic for Neuropediatrics and Neurorehabilitation, Epilepsy Center for Children and Adolescents, Schön Klinik Vogtareuth, Germany
,
Marko Wilke
1   Department of Pediatric Neurology and Developmental Medicine, University of Tübingen, Children's Hospital, Germany
2   Experimental Pediatric Neuroimaging, Department of Neuroradiology, University of Tübingen, Children's Hospital, Germany
› Institutsangaben
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

08. Dezember 2011

29. Mai 2012

Publikationsdatum:
23. September 2012 (online)

Auch verfügbar auf
    Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Purpose The term clinical functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) describes an examination with direct clinical impact on the patient. Interpretation of clinical fMRI especially in children, however, is often difficult due to suboptimal data quality. The current gold standard is standardized visual evaluation. To evaluate such data in an automated and objective way, we developed an approach to identify successful sessions.

Methods Average activation inside a predefined, task-specific region of interest (ROI) is compared with average activation in the rest of the brain, and their ratio (classification factor [F c]) is determined for different statistical thresholds (T). The approach was tested and validated using 239 clinical pediatric fMRI sessions (sensorimotor, perceptive /productive language). Performance was assessed in terms of sensitivity, specificity, and positive likelihood ratio.

Results Best performance was found for F c ≥ 2 and T ≥ 2.5, achieving a sensitivity of 0.87 and specificity of 0.94. Comparing the different domains, sensitivity was lowest for language production tasks, mainly due to atypical activation foci.

Conclusion We demonstrate that an objective, automated framework for the classification of clinical pediatric fMRI sessions may provide important additional information, supporting visual evaluation, especially from sensorimotor and language perception domains. In the current form, atypical or strong network activation is not easily captured.

Keywords

pediatric functional MRI - clinical fMRI - objective analysis
 

  • References

  • 1 Cabeza R, Nyberg L. Imaging cognition II: An empirical review of 275 PET and fMRI studies. J Cogn Neurosci 2000; 12 (1) 1-47
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Thulborn KR, Davis D, Erb P, Strojwas M, Sweeney JA. Clinical fMRI: implementation and experience. Neuroimage 1996; 4 (3 Pt 3) S101-S107
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Anderson DP, Harvey AS, Saling MM , et al. FMRI lateralization of expressive language in children with cerebral lesions. Epilepsia 2006; 47 (6) 998-1008
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Deblaere K, Boon PA, Vandemaele P , et al. MRI language dominance assessment in epilepsy patients at 1.0 T: region of interest analysis and comparison with intracarotid amytal testing. Neuroradiology 2004; 46 (6) 413-420
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Lehéricy S, Duffau H, Cornu P , et al. Correspondence between functional magnetic resonance imaging somatotopy and individual brain anatomy of the central region: comparison with intraoperative stimulation in patients with brain tumors. J Neurosurg 2000; 92 (4) 589-598
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Woermann FG, Jokeit H, Luerding R , et al. Language lateralization by Wada test and fMRI in 100 patients with epilepsy. Neurology 2003; 61 (5) 699-701
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Maitra R. A re-defined and generalized percent-overlap-of-activation measure for studies of fMRI reproducibility and its use in identifying outlier activation maps. Neuroimage 2010; 50 (1) 124-135
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Haller S, Bartsch AJ. Pitfalls in FMRI. Eur Radiol 2009; 19 (11) 2689-2706
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Church JA, Petersen SE, Schlaggar BL. The “Task B problem” and other considerations in developmental functional neuroimaging. Hum Brain Mapp 2010; 31 (6) 852-862
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Price CJ, Friston KJ. Scanning patients with tasks they can perform. Hum Brain Mapp 1999; 8 (2–3) 102-108
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Carter CS, Heckers S, Nichols T, Pine DS, Strother S. Optimizing the design and analysis of clinical functional magnetic resonance imaging research studies. Biol Psychiatry 2008; 64 (10) 842-849
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Detre JA. Clinical applicability of functional MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 23 (6) 808-815
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Jezzard P, Buxton RB. The clinical potential of functional magnetic resonance imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 23 (6) 787-793
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Lieberman MD, Cunningham WA. Type I and Type II error concerns in fMRI research: re-balancing the scale. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci 2009; 4 (4) 423-428
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Engström M, Karlsson M, Croné M , et al. Clinical fMRI of language function in aphasic patients: reading paradigm successful, while word generation paradigm fails. Acta Radiol 2010; 51 (6) 679-686
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Fernández G, Specht K, Weis S , et al. Intrasubject reproducibility of presurgical language lateralization and mapping using fMRI. Neurology 2003; 60 (6) 969-975
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Gaillard WD, Balsamo L, Xu B , et al. fMRI language task panel improves determination of language dominance. Neurology 2004; 63 (8) 1403-1408
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Jansen A, Sehlmeyer C, Pfleiderer B , et al. Assessment of verbal memory by fMRI: lateralization and functional neuroanatomy. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2009; 111 (1) 57-62
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Freilich ER, Gaillard WD. Utility of functional MRI in pediatric neurology. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep 2010; 10 (1) 40-46
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Gaillard WD, Grandin CB, Xu B. Developmental aspects of pediatric fMRI: considerations for image acquisition, analysis, and interpretation. Neuroimage 2001; 13 (2) 239-249
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Leach JL, Holland SK. Functional MRI in children: clinical and research applications. Pediatr Radiol 2010; 40 (1) 31-49
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Holland SK, Plante E, Weber Byars A, Strawsburg RH, Schmithorst VJ, Ball Jr WS. Normal fMRI brain activation patterns in children performing a verb generation task. Neuroimage 2001; 14 (4) 837-843
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Wilke M, Lidzba K, Staudt M, Buchenau K, Grodd W, Krägeloh-Mann I. Comprehensive language mapping in children, using functional magnetic resonance imaging: what's missing counts. Neuroreport 2005; 16 (9) 915-919
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Wilke M, Lidzba K, Staudt M, Buchenau K, Grodd W, Krägeloh-Mann I. An fMRI task battery for assessing hemispheric language dominance in children. Neuroimage 2006; 32 (1) 400-410
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Erberich SG, Friedlich P, Seri I, Nelson Jr MD, Blüml S. Functional MRI in neonates using neonatal head coil and MR compatible incubator. Neuroimage 2003; 20 (2) 683-692
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Guzzetta A, Staudt M, Petacchi E , et al. Brain representation of active and passive hand movements in children. Pediatr Res 2007; 61 (4) 485-490
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Staudt M, Pieper T, Grodd W, Winkler P, Holthausen H, Krägeloh-Mann I. Functional MRI in a 6-year-old boy with unilateral cortical malformation: concordant representation of both hands in the unaffected hemisphere. Neuropediatrics 2001; 32 (3) 159-161
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Yuan W, Altaye M, Ret J , et al. Quantification of head motion in children during various fMRI language tasks. Hum Brain Mapp 2009; 30 (5) 1481-1489
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Yerys BE, Jankowski KF, Shook D , et al. The fMRI success rate of children and adolescents: typical development, epilepsy, attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and autism spectrum disorders. Hum Brain Mapp 2009; 30 (10) 3426-3435
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Schapiro MB, Schmithorst VJ, Wilke M, Byars AW, Strawsburg RH, Holland SK. BOLD fMRI signal increases with age in selected brain regions in children. Neuroreport 2004; 15 (17) 2575-2578
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Wilke M, Pieper T, Lindner K , et al. Clinical functional MRI of the language domain in children with epilepsy. Hum Brain Mapp 2011; 32 (11) 1882-1893
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Durston S, Davidson MC, Tottenham N , et al. A shift from diffuse to focal cortical activity with development. Dev Sci 2006; 9 (1) 1-8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Staudt M, Grodd W, Niemann G, Wildgruber D, Erb M, Krägeloh-Mann I. Early left periventricular brain lesions induce right hemispheric organization of speech. Neurology 2001; 57 (1) 122-125
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Gaillard WD, Sachs BC, Whitnah JR , et al. Developmental aspects of language processing: fMRI of verbal fluency in children and adults. Hum Brain Mapp 2003; 18 (3) 176-185
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Wink AM, Roerdink JB. Denoising functional MR images: a comparison of wavelet denoising and Gaussian smoothing. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2004; 23 (3) 374-387
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Andersson JL, Hutton C, Ashburner J, Turner R, Friston K. Modeling geometric deformations in EPI time series. Neuroimage 2001; 13 (5) 903-919
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Macey PM, Macey KE, Kumar R, Harper RM. A method for removal of global effects from fMRI time series. Neuroimage 2004; 22 (1) 360-366
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Friston KJ, Holmes AP, Worsley KJ , et al. Statistical parametric maps in functional imaging: A general linear approach. Hum Brain Mapp 1994; 2: 189-210
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Ashburner J, Friston KJ. Unified segmentation. Neuroimage 2005; 26 (3) 839-851
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Wilke M, Holland SK, Altaye M, Gaser C. Template-O-Matic: a toolbox for creating customized pediatric templates. Neuroimage 2008; 41 (3) 903-913
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Staudt M, Lidzba K, Grodd W, Wildgruber D, Erb M, Krägeloh-Mann I. Right-hemispheric organization of language following early left-sided brain lesions: functional MRI topography. Neuroimage 2002; 16 (4) 954-967
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Lidzba K, Staudt M, Wilke M, Grodd W, Krägeloh-Mann I. Lesion-induced right-hemispheric language and organization of nonverbal functions. Neuroreport 2006; 17 (9) 929-933
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Staudt M, Grodd W, Gerloff C, Erb M, Stitz J, Krägeloh-Mann I. Two types of ipsilateral reorganization in congenital hemiparesis: a TMS and fMRI study. Brain 2002; 125 (Pt 10) 2222-2237
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Staudt M. (Re-)organization of the developing human brain following periventricular white matter lesions. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2007; 31 (8) 1150-1156
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Wilke M, Staudt M, Juenger H, Grodd W, Braun C, Krägeloh-Mann I. Somatosensory system in two types of motor reorganization in congenital hemiparesis: topography and function. Hum Brain Mapp 2009; 30 (3) 776-788
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Wilke M, Lidzba K. LI-tool: a new toolbox to assess lateralization in functional MR-data. J Neurosci Methods 2007; 163 (1) 128-136
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Davison AC, Hinkley DV, Young GA. Recent Developments in Bootstrap Methodology. Stat Sci 2003; 18: 141-157
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Wilke M, Schmithorst VJ. A combined bootstrap/histogram analysis approach for computing a lateralization index from neuroimaging data. Neuroimage 2006; 33 (2) 522-530
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Bellec P, Rosa-Neto P, Lyttelton OC, Benali H, Evans AC. Multi-level bootstrap analysis of stable clusters in resting-state fMRI. Neuroimage 2010; 51 (3) 1126-1139
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Bizzi A, Blasi V, Falini A , et al. Presurgical functional MR imaging of language and motor functions: validation with intraoperative electrocortical mapping. Radiology 2008; 248 (2) 579-589
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Liégeois F, Cross JH, Gadian DG, Connelly A. Role of fMRI in the decision-making process: epilepsy surgery for children. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 23 (6) 933-940
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Voets NL, Adcock JE, Flitney DE , et al. Distinct right frontal lobe activation in language processing following left hemisphere injury. Brain 2006; 129 (Pt 3) 754-766
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Mbwana J, Berl MM, Ritzl EK , et al. Limitations to plasticity of language network reorganization in localization related epilepsy. Brain 2009; 132 (Pt 2) 347-356
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Rosenberger LR, Zeck J, Berl MM , et al. Interhemispheric and intrahemispheric language reorganization in complex partial epilepsy. Neurology 2009; 72 (21) 1830-1836
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Staudt M, Braun C, Gerloff C, Erb M, Grodd W, Krägeloh-Mann I. Developing somatosensory projections bypass periventricular brain lesions. Neurology 2006; 67 (3) 522-525
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Wellmer J, Weber B, Urbach H, Reul J, Fernandez G, Elger CE. Cerebral lesions can impair fMRI-based language lateralization. Epilepsia 2009; 50 (10) 2213-2224
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Alkadhi H, Crelier GR, Boendermaker SH, Golay X, Hepp-Reymond MC, Kollias SS. Reproducibility of primary motor cortex somatotopy under controlled conditions. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2002; 23 (9) 1524-1532
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Uylings HB, Rajkowska G, Sanz-Arigita E, Amunts K, Zilles K. Consequences of large interindividual variability for human brain atlases: converging macroscopical imaging and microscopical neuroanatomy. Anat Embryol (Berl) 2005; 210 (5–6) 423-431
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Kadis DS, Iida K, Kerr EN , et al. Intrahemispheric reorganization of language in children with medically intractable epilepsy of the left hemisphere. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 2007; 13 (3) 505-516
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Krings T, Erberich SG, Roessler F, Reul J, Thron A. MR blood oxygenation level-dependent signal differences in parenchymal and large draining vessels: implications for functional MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1999; 20 (10) 1907-1914
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Ruff IM, Petrovich Brennan NM, Peck KK , et al. Assessment of the language laterality index in patients with brain tumor using functional MR imaging: effects of thresholding, task selection, and prior surgery. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2008; 29 (3) 528-535
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 62 Beisteiner R, Klinger N, Höllinger I , et al. How much are clinical fMRI reports influenced by standard postprocessing methods? An investigation of normalization and region of interest effects in the medial temporal lobe. Hum Brain Mapp 2010; 31 (12) 1951-1966
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 63 Wilke M, Schmithorst VJ, Holland SK. Assessment of spatial normalization of whole-brain magnetic resonance images in children. Hum Brain Mapp 2002; 17 (1) 48-60
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar