[Mristudio-users] Alternative way

[Lou muscarella]

How do I get off this list serve?   Please take me off> Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2008 21:09:17 +0900> From: dearfreud at gmail.com> To: mristudio-users at mristudio.org> Subject: Re: [Mristudio-users] Alternative way> > Dear Dr Mori,> > > Thank you very much for your kind, detailed explanation.> > I'd like to go through each method you've shown and choose one.> > > Sincerely,> > Takahiko Kawashima> > Dear Takahiro,> >> >> >> > There are two options, as you already know. One is to report the > > average FA of the entire reconstructed fiber. After reconstruction, > > you get only one FA number. If you use CUT, that is the averaged FA > > of all pixels in between the two ROIs.> >> >> >> > The second option is to report FA of pixels at each axial, > > sagittal, or coronal slice. This is a good method for something > > like the corticospinal tract, which is rather linear. > > Unfortunately, for something like the UF and corpus callosum, with > > U-shape trajectory, this approach is not optimum.> >> >> >> > At this point, there is not a good solution for that. There may be > > some time consuming way to separate the U-shape trajectory to two I- > > shape trajectories. For example, you can save the tracking results > > as a 1/0 binary image and read it by RoiEditor. Using the threshold > > tool, you can re-define the pixels within the UF in RoiEditor. With > > a bit of trick like manually introduce a gap within the trajectory, > > you can separate the one U-shape trajectory to two regions like > > upper UF and lower UF. Then RoiEditor can report FA values along > > coronal planes.> >> >> >> > Well, maybe this is too complicated. Alternatively, you can use > > Landmarker to normalize the binarized UF images and create a pixel- > > by-pixel population-averaged map, although, you introduce a new > > nuisance factor (= registration quality).> >> >> >> > Susumu> >> >> >> > From: mristudio-users-bounces at mristudio.org [mailto:mristudio-users- > > bounces at mristudio.org] On Behalf Of Takahiko Kawashima> > Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 11:25 AM> > To: mristudio-users at mristudio.org> > Subject: [Mristudio-users] Alternative way> >> >> >> > Dear users,> >> >> >> > Hi,> >> >> >> > I'm trying to calculate FA of tracts not running along only one > > axis, such as uncinate fasciculus (UF).> >> >> >> > At first I planned to combine CUT with other operations to > > calculate FA only between the CUT ROIs (in the case of UF, one one > > coronal and one on axial slice).> >> > But recently I've found it was a fundamental misunderstanding. (by > > reading Dr> >> >> >> > If possible, I'd like to get a mean FA of summed "each fiber" FA in > > depicted fibers within a defined region.> >> > Could anybody tell me some alternative ways to do this, please?> >> > Or, if I want to calculate FA within a defined region, can't I do > > anything but to consider a mean FA of "all the voxels" on which the > > fibers run?> >> >> >> > Because I am totally a beginner and poor in English, this question > > might look quite embarrassing and illegible.> >> > I hope your kind answer, and I'll really appreciate it.> >> >> >> >> >> > Best Regards,> >> >> >> > Takahiko Kawashima @ Kyoto university> >> > _______________________________________________> > Mristudio-users mailing list> > Mristudio-users at mristudio.org> > http://lists.mristudio.org/mailman/listinfo/mristudio-users> _______________________________________________> Mristudio-users mailing list> Mristudio-users at mristudio.org> http://lists.mristudio.org/mailman/listinfo/mristudio-users
_________________________________________________________________
When your life is on the go—take your life with you.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/115298558/direct/01/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mristudio.org/pipermail/mristudio-users/attachments/20081103/387de37d/attachment.html