Hi Stefano,
When segmenting 1 mm scans, the position of the internal boundaries between the hippocampal substructures largely relies on prior knowledge acquired from our ex vivo training data and summarized in our statistical atlas. For this reason, volumes of internal subfields (especially GC-DG, CA4 and molecular layer) must be interpreted with caution, and further validation with higher resolution data should ideally be carried out to confirm the results. On the other end of the spectrum, we have substructures such as the fimbria and tail, which are reliable at 1 mm.
Cheers,
/Eugenio
Juan Eugenio Iglesias ERC Senior Research Fellow Translational Imaging Group University College London http://www.jeiglesias.com http://cmictig.cs.ucl.ac.uk/
On 24 Jan 2017, at 21:35, stdp82@virgilio.itmailto:stdp82@virgilio.it wrote:
Hi list, I'm performing hippo-subfields analysis on T1 having the followed parameters:
data_type INT32 dim1 170 dim2 256 dim3 256 dim4 1 datatype 8 pixdim1 1.200005 pixdim2 1.000000 pixdim3 1.000000 pixdim4 1.000000 cal_max 0.0000 cal_min 0.0000 file_type NIFTI-1+
Does my result will be reliable also whether I avoid to add the T2 scan?
Thanks
Stefano _______________________________________________ Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edumailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu 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.