Masami Goto1,2, Osamu Abe3, Tosiaki Miyati4, Hiroyuki Kabasawa5, Takeshi Iwatsubo6, Hiroshi Matsuda7, Fumio Yamashita8, Shigeki Aoki9, Harushi Mori3, Naoto Hayashi10, Kenji Ino1, Keiichi Yano1, Kyouhito Iida1, Kazuo Mima1, Kuni Ohtomo3
1Radiological Technology, University of Tokyo Hospital, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan; 2Graduate School of Medical Science, Kanazawa University, odateno, kanazawa, Japan; 3Radiology, University of Tokyo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo; 4Graduate School of Medical Science, Kanazawa University, odateno, Kanazawa, Japan; 5Japan Applied Science Laboratory, GE Yokogawa Medical Systems, Ltd, Hino-shi, Tokyo, Japan; 6Neuropathology, University of Tokyo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan; 7Nuclear Medicine, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Saitama, Japan; 8Radiology, National Center Hospital of Neurology and Psychiatry, Kodaira, Tokyo, Japan; 9Radiology, Juntendo University, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan; 10Computational Diagnostic Radiology and Preventive Medicine, University of Tokyo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
Because we compared the same volunteer group, it was supposed to be no significant group difference. However, there are significant group differences. The cause will be due to intensity non-uniformity in the 3T image. If there is no significant group difference, such an intensity correction is believed to be efficient. In the present study, the intensity non-uniformity correction is more effective in SPM5 than N3. It is impossible to measure greal brain volumeh and there is no gold standard of brain volume measurement. However, this result suggests that intensity non-uniformity correction is necessary to reduce inhomogeneity between MR scanners.
Keywords