Comparison of prospective head motion correction with NMR field probes and an optical tracking system

Martin Eschelbach*, Ali Aghaeifar, Jonas Bause, Jonas Handwerker, Jens Anders, Eva Maria Engel, Axel Thielscher, Klaus Scheffler

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare prospective head motion correction and motion tracking abilities of two tracking systems: Active NMR field probes and a Moiré phase tracking camera system using an optical marker. Methods: Both tracking systems were used simultaneously on human subjects. The prospective head motion correction was compared in an MP2RAGE and a gradient echo sequence. In addition, the motion tracking trajectories for three subjects were compared against each other and their correlation and deviations were analyzed. Results: With both tracking systems motion artifacts were visibly reduced. The precision of the field probe system was on the order of 50 µm for translations and 0.03° for rotations while the camera's was approximately 5 µm and 0.007°. The comparison of the measured trajectories showed close correlation and an average absolute deviation below 500 µm and 0.5°. Conclusion: This study presents the first in vivo comparison between NMR field probes and Moiré phase tracking. For the gradient echo images, the field probes had a similar motion correction performance as the optical tracking system. For the MP2RAGE measurement, however, the camera yielded better results. Still, both tracking systems substantially decreased image artifacts in the presence of subject motion. Thus, the motion tracking modality should be chosen according to the specific requirements of the experiment while considering the desired image resolution, refresh rate, and head coil constraints.

Original languageEnglish
JournalMagnetic Resonance in Medicine
Volume81
Issue number1
Pages (from-to)719-729
ISSN0740-3194
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2018

Keywords

  • Field probes
  • Head motion
  • Moiré phase tracking
  • Motion correction
  • Prospective
  • Tracking

Cite this

Eschelbach, M., Aghaeifar, A., Bause, J., Handwerker, J., Anders, J., Engel, E. M., ... Scheffler, K. (2018). Comparison of prospective head motion correction with NMR field probes and an optical tracking system. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, 81(1), 719-729. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.27343
Eschelbach, Martin ; Aghaeifar, Ali ; Bause, Jonas ; Handwerker, Jonas ; Anders, Jens ; Engel, Eva Maria ; Thielscher, Axel ; Scheffler, Klaus. / Comparison of prospective head motion correction with NMR field probes and an optical tracking system. In: Magnetic Resonance in Medicine. 2018 ; Vol. 81, No. 1. pp. 719-729.
@article{a03e7757a1ea47a89644345ce5f8f0cc,
title = "Comparison of prospective head motion correction with NMR field probes and an optical tracking system",
abstract = "Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare prospective head motion correction and motion tracking abilities of two tracking systems: Active NMR field probes and a Moir{\'e} phase tracking camera system using an optical marker. Methods: Both tracking systems were used simultaneously on human subjects. The prospective head motion correction was compared in an MP2RAGE and a gradient echo sequence. In addition, the motion tracking trajectories for three subjects were compared against each other and their correlation and deviations were analyzed. Results: With both tracking systems motion artifacts were visibly reduced. The precision of the field probe system was on the order of 50 µm for translations and 0.03° for rotations while the camera's was approximately 5 µm and 0.007°. The comparison of the measured trajectories showed close correlation and an average absolute deviation below 500 µm and 0.5°. Conclusion: This study presents the first in vivo comparison between NMR field probes and Moir{\'e} phase tracking. For the gradient echo images, the field probes had a similar motion correction performance as the optical tracking system. For the MP2RAGE measurement, however, the camera yielded better results. Still, both tracking systems substantially decreased image artifacts in the presence of subject motion. Thus, the motion tracking modality should be chosen according to the specific requirements of the experiment while considering the desired image resolution, refresh rate, and head coil constraints.",
keywords = "Field probes, Head motion, Moir{\'e} phase tracking, Motion correction, Prospective, Tracking",
author = "Martin Eschelbach and Ali Aghaeifar and Jonas Bause and Jonas Handwerker and Jens Anders and Engel, {Eva Maria} and Axel Thielscher and Klaus Scheffler",
year = "2018",
doi = "10.1002/mrm.27343",
language = "English",
volume = "81",
pages = "719--729",
journal = "Magnetic Resonance in Medicine",
issn = "0740-3194",
publisher = "JohnWiley & Sons, Inc.",
number = "1",

}

Eschelbach, M, Aghaeifar, A, Bause, J, Handwerker, J, Anders, J, Engel, EM, Thielscher, A & Scheffler, K 2018, 'Comparison of prospective head motion correction with NMR field probes and an optical tracking system', Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, vol. 81, no. 1, pp. 719-729. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.27343

Comparison of prospective head motion correction with NMR field probes and an optical tracking system. / Eschelbach, Martin; Aghaeifar, Ali; Bause, Jonas; Handwerker, Jonas; Anders, Jens; Engel, Eva Maria; Thielscher, Axel; Scheffler, Klaus.

In: Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, Vol. 81, No. 1, 2018, p. 719-729.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of prospective head motion correction with NMR field probes and an optical tracking system

AU - Eschelbach, Martin

AU - Aghaeifar, Ali

AU - Bause, Jonas

AU - Handwerker, Jonas

AU - Anders, Jens

AU - Engel, Eva Maria

AU - Thielscher, Axel

AU - Scheffler, Klaus

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare prospective head motion correction and motion tracking abilities of two tracking systems: Active NMR field probes and a Moiré phase tracking camera system using an optical marker. Methods: Both tracking systems were used simultaneously on human subjects. The prospective head motion correction was compared in an MP2RAGE and a gradient echo sequence. In addition, the motion tracking trajectories for three subjects were compared against each other and their correlation and deviations were analyzed. Results: With both tracking systems motion artifacts were visibly reduced. The precision of the field probe system was on the order of 50 µm for translations and 0.03° for rotations while the camera's was approximately 5 µm and 0.007°. The comparison of the measured trajectories showed close correlation and an average absolute deviation below 500 µm and 0.5°. Conclusion: This study presents the first in vivo comparison between NMR field probes and Moiré phase tracking. For the gradient echo images, the field probes had a similar motion correction performance as the optical tracking system. For the MP2RAGE measurement, however, the camera yielded better results. Still, both tracking systems substantially decreased image artifacts in the presence of subject motion. Thus, the motion tracking modality should be chosen according to the specific requirements of the experiment while considering the desired image resolution, refresh rate, and head coil constraints.

AB - Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare prospective head motion correction and motion tracking abilities of two tracking systems: Active NMR field probes and a Moiré phase tracking camera system using an optical marker. Methods: Both tracking systems were used simultaneously on human subjects. The prospective head motion correction was compared in an MP2RAGE and a gradient echo sequence. In addition, the motion tracking trajectories for three subjects were compared against each other and their correlation and deviations were analyzed. Results: With both tracking systems motion artifacts were visibly reduced. The precision of the field probe system was on the order of 50 µm for translations and 0.03° for rotations while the camera's was approximately 5 µm and 0.007°. The comparison of the measured trajectories showed close correlation and an average absolute deviation below 500 µm and 0.5°. Conclusion: This study presents the first in vivo comparison between NMR field probes and Moiré phase tracking. For the gradient echo images, the field probes had a similar motion correction performance as the optical tracking system. For the MP2RAGE measurement, however, the camera yielded better results. Still, both tracking systems substantially decreased image artifacts in the presence of subject motion. Thus, the motion tracking modality should be chosen according to the specific requirements of the experiment while considering the desired image resolution, refresh rate, and head coil constraints.

KW - Field probes

KW - Head motion

KW - Moiré phase tracking

KW - Motion correction

KW - Prospective

KW - Tracking

U2 - 10.1002/mrm.27343

DO - 10.1002/mrm.27343

M3 - Journal article

VL - 81

SP - 719

EP - 729

JO - Magnetic Resonance in Medicine

JF - Magnetic Resonance in Medicine

SN - 0740-3194

IS - 1

ER -