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.

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.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.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.