Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Publication Preview--Ahead of Print
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
    • COVID-19 Content and Resources
  • For Authors
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editors
    • American Society of Neuroradiology
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Podcasts
    • Subscribe on iTunes
    • Subscribe on Stitcher
  • More
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Other Publications
    • ajnr

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Journal of Neuroradiology
American Journal of Neuroradiology

American Journal of Neuroradiology

  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Publication Preview--Ahead of Print
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
    • COVID-19 Content and Resources
  • For Authors
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editors
    • American Society of Neuroradiology
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Podcasts
    • Subscribe on iTunes
    • Subscribe on Stitcher
  • More
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Follow AJNR on Twitter
  • Visit AJNR on Facebook
  • Follow AJNR on Instagram
  • Join AJNR on LinkedIn
  • RSS Feeds
Research ArticleBRAIN

Evaluation of a Signal Intensity Mask in the Interpretation of Functional MR Imaging Activation Maps

Roberta M. Strigel, Chad H. Moritz, Victor M. Haughton, Behnam Badie, Aaron Field, David Wood, Michael Hartman and Howard A. Rowley
American Journal of Neuroradiology March 2005, 26 (3) 578-584;
Roberta M. Strigel
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Chad H. Moritz
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Victor M. Haughton
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Behnam Badie
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Aaron Field
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
David Wood
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Michael Hartman
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Howard A. Rowley
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Fig 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig 1.

    Illustration of SIM map processing. Top row, three noncontiguous coronal EPIs from an fMRI patient dataset show diminished signal intensity from the medial-inferior frontal lobes. Middle row, same sections converted to semitransparent colored masks, which can be superimposed on anatomic images. Bottom row, spatially smoothed version of the masks overlaid on coregistered high-resolution anatomic T1-weighted images. Colorization in the SIM demonstrates regions of adequate EPI signal intensity for detection of the BOLD effect.

  • Fig 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig 2.

    Types of susceptibility artifact.

    A, Type I signal intensity loss in the regions of the sinuses or skull base.

    B, Type II signal intensity loss due to incomplete coverage of the brain with the EPI.

    C, Type III signal intensity absence in a region of brain distant from the sinuses or skull base. In this case, a cavernous hemangioma with blood products produces the susceptibility effect.

  • Fig 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig 3.

    fMRIs in which three readers changed their answer when the SIM was available. (Paradigm was listening to narrated text.)

    A, Readers were asked if the left auditory cortex was intact. Three responded “no,” and one responded “indeterminate.”

    B, On viewing the SIM, which shows a large area of signal loss in the left temporal lobe, all four readers answered “indeterminate.” Signal intensity dropout was due to hemosiderin from an AVM.

  • Fig 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Fig 4.

    fMRI study of language. (Paradigm was antonym word generation from visual cues).

    A and B, Patient had a large susceptibility artifact, as evident on the SIM in B, due to dental braces. On the basis of the images in A, three readers considered frontal language dominance indeterminate and one fellow reader considered it right. Two staff readers considered posterior language dominance indeterminate, one fellow reader considered it right, and one fellow considered it mixed. After viewing the mask SIM, all four readers considered both frontal and posterior language dominance indeterminate.

    C, Prior fMRIs obtained before the placement of dental braces clearly demonstrate left dominance for language.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    TABLE 1:

    Questions and answers for the reviewers in the blinded study

    Category and QuestionAnswer
    Language
        Frontal hemispheric dominance for language?L, R, mixed, indeterminate
        Posterior hemispheric dominance for language?L, R, mixed, indeterminate
    Sensorimotor
        R sensory cortex location?Normal, abnormal, indeterminate
        L sensory cortex location?Normal, abnormal, indeterminate
        L motor cortex location?Normal, abnormal, indeterminate
        L sensorimotor cortex location?Normal, abnormal, indeterminate
        R sensorimotor cortex location?Normal, abnormal, indeterminate
        R sensorimotor cortex location (L foot)?Normal, abnormal, indeterminate
        L sensorimotor cortex location (R foot)?Normal, abnormal, indeterminate
        R sensorimotor cortex location (L hand)?Normal, abnormal, indeterminate
        L motor cortex location (R foot)?Normal, abnormal, indeterminate
    Auditory
        R auditory cortex intact?Yes, no, indeterminate
        L auditory cortex intact?Yes, no, indeterminate
    • View popup
    TABLE 2:

    Presence of type III (susceptibility) artifacts by primary diagnosis

    Primary DiagnosisArtifacts
    Tumor (n = 95)38 (40)
    Vascular (n = 42)27 (64)
    Trauma (n = 2)2 (100)
    Other (n = 13)0 (0)
    • Note.—Data in parentheses are percentages.

    • View popup
    TABLE 3:

    Causes of type III magnetic susceptibility artifacts in 67 patients

    CauseCases
    Blood products38 (25)
    Surgical site30 (20)
    Calcium12 (8)
    Embolization materials2 (1)
    Dental devices2 (1)
    Air2 (1)
    Basal ganglia mineralization1 (1)
    Intracranial pressure monitor1 (1)
    • Note.—Data in parentheses are the percentage based on 152 patients.

    • View popup
    TABLE 4:

    Change in fMRI interpretation with SIM by neuroradiology fellows

    Fellow and QuestionInitial AnswerAnswer with SIM
    Fellow 3
        Frontal hemispheric dominance for language?LIndeterminate
    LIndeterminate
    LIndeterminate
        Posterior hemispheric dominance for language?RIndeterminate
        R auditory cortex intact?NoIndeterminate
    NoIndeterminate
        L auditory cortex intact?NoIndeterminate
    NoIndeterminate
        R foot sensorimotor cortex location?AbnormalIndeterminate
        R sensorimotor cortex location?AbnormalIndeterminate
        L motor cortex location?AbnormalIndeterminate
        L foot motor cortex location?AbnormalIndeterminate
    Fellow 4
        Frontal hemispheric dominance for language?RIndeterminate
    RIndeterminate
    LMixed
    LMixed
    LMixed
        Posterior hemispheric dominance for language?LIndeterminate
    LMixed
    LMixed
    MixedIndeterminate
        R auditory cortex intact?NoIndeterminate
        L auditory cortex intact?NoIndeterminate
    NoIndeterminate
        R hand sensorimotor cortex location?AbnormalIndeterminate
        R sensorimotor cortex location?AbnormalIndeterminate
        L motor cortex location?AbnormalIndeterminate
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

American Journal of Neuroradiology: 26 (3)
American Journal of Neuroradiology
Vol. 26, Issue 3
1 Mar 2005
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Advertisement
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Journal of Neuroradiology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Evaluation of a Signal Intensity Mask in the Interpretation of Functional MR Imaging Activation Maps
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Journal of Neuroradiology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Journal of Neuroradiology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Evaluation of a Signal Intensity Mask in the Interpretation of Functional MR Imaging Activation Maps
Roberta M. Strigel, Chad H. Moritz, Victor M. Haughton, Behnam Badie, Aaron Field, David Wood, Michael Hartman, Howard A. Rowley
American Journal of Neuroradiology Mar 2005, 26 (3) 578-584;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Evaluation of a Signal Intensity Mask in the Interpretation of Functional MR Imaging Activation Maps
Roberta M. Strigel, Chad H. Moritz, Victor M. Haughton, Behnam Badie, Aaron Field, David Wood, Michael Hartman, Howard A. Rowley
American Journal of Neuroradiology Mar 2005, 26 (3) 578-584;
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Crossref
  • Google Scholar

This article has not yet been cited by articles in journals that are participating in Crossref Cited-by Linking.

More in this TOC Section

  • Optimal MRI Sequence for Identifying Occlusion Location in Acute Stroke: Which Value of Time-Resolved Contrast-Enhanced MRA?
  • Evaluating the Effects of White Matter Multiple Sclerosis Lesions on the Volume Estimation of 6 Brain Tissue Segmentation Methods
  • Quiet PROPELLER MRI Techniques Match the Quality of Conventional PROPELLER Brain Imaging Techniques
Show more BRAIN

Similar Articles

Advertisement

News and Updates

  • Lucien Levy Best Research Article Award
  • Thanks to our 2022 Distinguished Reviewers
  • Press Releases

Resources

  • Evidence-Based Medicine Level Guide
  • How to Participate in a Tweet Chat
  • AJNR Podcast Archive
  • Ideas for Publicizing Your Research
  • Librarian Resources
  • Terms and Conditions

Opportunities

  • Share Your Art in Perspectives
  • Get Peer Review Credit from Publons
  • Moderate a Tweet Chat

American Society of Neuroradiology

  • Neurographics
  • ASNR Annual Meeting
  • Fellowship Portal
  • Position Statements

© 2023 by the American Society of Neuroradiology | Print ISSN: 0195-6108 Online ISSN: 1936-959X

Powered by HighWire