Measuring variability of local brain volume using improved volume preserved warping.

Abstract

Measuring local brain volume is clinically important in neuroimaging studies. Voxel preserved warping (VPW) and Jacobian determinant are effective methods for studying local brain volume changes and variations (LBVCV) across multiple brains. However, these LBVCV methods typically depend on the local deformation without using the global deformation, while both deformations are needed in co-registering the brains under examination so that the brains can be compared on a common and fair basis. However, instead of employing a uniformed strategy, different co-registration methods have developed their own unique strategy in performing global and local transformation of the co-registration of the brains, and how the global and local transformations may combine to achieve the final goal of co-registration is not their concern, as long as the final registration may accomplish the co-registering job satisfactorily. The aforementioned inconsistency thus makes the LBVCV measurement that relies on the registration methods for studying local brain volumes totally unstable and actually unreliable. To address the uncertainty in measuring local brain volume variability caused by the un-uniqueness of performing global and local deformations during co-registration, the present study proposes new VPW approaches (VPWα and VPWβ), which no longer require the separation of the global and local transformation components but employ only the general deformation concatenating both components, as long as the general registration may achieve the task of co-registering brain images. The new VPW methods are validated in theory and in practice, using both simulated and real-world imaging data, respectively, based on two registration methods popularly in use by the neuroimaging research community, i.e., the Automatic Registration Toolbox (ART) and Symmetric Image Normalization Method (SyN) registration methods. Experiments using simulated data demonstrated that the proposed new VPW methods may reliably measure local brain volume changes and variability. In contrast, traditional methods typically may result in LBVCV maps containing significantly inconsistent even false findings. In the experiments using real neuroimaging datasets from a schizophrenia study, the results based on the proposed new VPW methods were highly consistent, no matter which registration method was employed. Otherwise, the LBVCV results based on traditional approaches would show significant difference, depending on the individual registration method that the analysis employed. LBVCV assessments based on traditional methods appear to be unreliable. The proposed new VPW methods for measuring local volume changes is independent of registration methods, and therefore can serve as alternative approaches for assessing LBVCV reliably.