Hi Christopher, yes, my position on BBR for PET has changed. I ran an
analysis on FDG from an HR+ using BBR and coreg, and the results were
not different enough to warrant choosing one over the other. However,
coreg performed better on simulated FDG HR+ data, so I'm recommending
coreg over BBR, at least for typical resolution scanners like the HR+.
For high res (eg, HRRT), BBR may still be better. But for data with a
PSF of around 6mm or higher, I would go with coreg.
BBR remains the method of choice for all MRI volumes.
doug
On 11/1/16 10:21 AM, Schwarz, Christopher G., Ph.D. wrote:
Dr. Greve,
I noticed on https://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/PetSurfer
<https://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/PetSurfer> that you’re
recommending mri_coreg instead of bbregister for PET-MRI alignment in
PETSurfer. This seems inconsistent with your 2014 NeuroImage paper
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811913012251
“BBR is very robust with respect to image artifacts and so an ideal
candidate for PET-MR registration”
Has your position on BBR for PET-MRI changed? Was mri_coreg later
found to be more robust?
Thank you for your time,
Christopher Schwarz
*--*
*Christopher G. Schwarz, Ph.D.*| Research Associate, Diagnostic
Radiology | Opus Center for Advanced Imaging Research | 507-538-4867 |
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Mayo Clinic*| 200 First Street SW | Rochester, MN 55905 |
http://mayoclinic.org <http://mayoclinic.org/>
_______________________________________________
Freesurfer mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is
addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mail
contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance HelpLine at
http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in error
but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and properly
dispose of the e-mail.
