ArticleMagnetic resonance imaging2022
EPI susceptibility correction introduces significant differences far from local areas of high distortion.
Article in Magnetic resonance imaging, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep learning-based Desikan-Killiany parcellation of the brain using diffusion MRI.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Radon-Guided Wavelet-Domain Attention U-Net for Periodic Artifact Suppression in Brain MRI.Journal of imaging · 2026Article
- MICAFlow: Fast and robust MRI preprocessing bridging research neuroimaging and clinical practice.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2026Article
- Comparison of distortion correction preprocessing pipelines for DTI in the upper limb.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2024Article
- Accurate, repeatable, and geometrically precise diffusion-weighted imaging on a 0.35 T magnetic resonance imaging-guided linear accelerator.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2023Article
- Characterization of motion dependent magnetic field inhomogeneity for DWI in the kidneys.Magnetic resonance imaging · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeIn echo-planar diffusion-weighted imaging, correcting for susceptibility-induced artifacts typically requires acquiring pairs of images, known as blip-up blip-down acquisitions, to create an undistorted volume as a target to correct distortions that are often focal where regions with differences in magnetic susceptibility interface, such as the frontal and temporal areas. However, blip-up blip-down acquisitions are not always available, and distortion effects may not be specifically localized to such areas, with subtle effects potentially extending throughout the brain. Here, we apply a deep learning technique to generate an undistorted volume to correct susceptibility-induced artifacts and demonstrate implications for image fidelity and diffusion-based inference outside of areas where high focal distortion is present.
methodsTo demonstrate differences due to susceptibility artifact correction, uncorrected baseline images were compared to identical images where correction was performed using an undistorted target volume produced by the deep learning tool "PreQual". Widespread geometric distortion was assessed visually by referencing diffusion-weighted images to T1-weighted images. Tract-based spatial statistics (TBSS) were utilized to perform whole brain analysis of fractional anisotropy (FA) values to assess differences between subject groups (depressed vs. non-depressed) via permutation-based, voxel-wise testing. Multivariate regression models were then used to contrast TBSS results between corrected and non-corrected diffusion images.
resultsSusceptibility artifact correction resulted in visible, widespread improvement in image fidelity when referenced to T1-weighted images. TBSS results were dependent on susceptibility artifact correction with correction resulting in widespread structural alterations of the mean FA skeleton, changes in skeletal FA, and additional positive tests of significance of regression coefficients in subsequent regression models.
conclusionOur results indicated that EPI distortion effects are not purely focal, and that reducing distortion can result in significant differences in the interpretation of diffusion data, even in areas remote from high distortion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.