Neurite density imaging versus imaging of microscopic anisotropy in diffusion MRI: A model comparison using spherical tensor encoding

Abstract

In diffusion MRI (dMRI), microscopic diffusion anisotropy can be obscured by orientation dispersion. Separation of these properties is of high importance, since it could allow dMRI to non-invasively probe elongated structures such as neurites (axons and dendrites). However, conventional dMRI, based on single diffusion encoding (SDE), entangles microscopic anisotropy and orientation dispersion with intra-voxel variance in isotropic diffusivity. SDE-based methods for estimating microscopic anisotropy, such as the neurite orientation dispersion and density imaging (NODDI) method, must thus rely on model assumptions to disentangle these features. An alternative approach is to directly quantify microscopic anisotropy by the use of variable shape of the b-tensor. Along those lines, we here present the 'constrained diffusional variance decomposition' (CODIVIDE) method, which jointly analyzes data acquired with diffusion encoding applied in a single direction at a time (linear tensor encoding, LTE) and in all directions (spherical tensor encoding, STE). We then contrast the two approaches by comparing neurite density estimated using NODDI with microscopic anisotropy estimated using CODIVIDE. Data were acquired in healthy volunteers and in glioma patients. NODDI and CODIVIDE differed the most in gray matter and in gliomas, where NODDI detected a neurite fraction higher than expected from the level of microscopic diffusion anisotropy found with CODIVIDE. The discrepancies could be explained by the NODDI tortuosity assumption, which enforces a connection between the neurite density and the mean diffusivity of tissue. Our results suggest that this assumption is invalid, which leads to a NODDI neurite density that is inconsistent between LTE and STE data. Using simulations, we demonstrate that the NODDI assumptions result in parameter bias that precludes the use of NODDI to map neurite density. With CODIVIDE, we found high levels of microscopic anisotropy in white matter, intermediate levels in structures such as the thalamus and the putamen, and low levels in the cortex and in gliomas. We conclude that accurate mapping of microscopic anisotropy requires data acquired with variable shape of the b-tensor.

Measuring intra‐axonal T2 in white matter with direction‐averaged diffusion MRI

“…The advantage of TEdDI, however, is that it also estimates T 2e , along with several diffusion parameters. Another approach for estimating compartmental T 2 is the recently proposed b‐tensor method …”

Local volume fraction distributions of axons, astrocytes, and myelin in deep subcortical white matter

“…The validation of dMRI biophysical models is generally hindered by the complexity and unavailability of the ground truth. Some of the prominent dMRI biophysical models make unrealistic assumptions and hence renders the results of these models dubious (Lampinen et al, 2017). In addition, in absence of additional information, the precise estimation of the model parameters requires a huge amount of measurements.…”

Characterizing Structural Changes With Evolving Remyelination Following Experimental Demyelination Using High Angular Resolution Diffusion MRI and Texture Analysis

“…Recent studies in MS patients suggest that NODDI may be a sensitive tool for differentiating white matter lesions from the normal‐appearing white matter (NAWM) as compared to other diffusion‐weighted imaging methods including DTI and diffusion kurtosis imaging, and for detecting alterations in the NAWM . However, evidence using NODDI to follow de‐ and remyelination is limited and others have also found that the utility of NODDI for myelin identification needs further verification …”