Hi Christopher, yes, my position on BBR for PET has changed. I ran an analysis on FDG from an HR+ using BBR and coreg, and the results were not different enough to warrant choosing one over the other. However, coreg performed better on simulated FDG HR+ data, so I'm recommending coreg over BBR, at least for typical resolution scanners like the HR+. For high res (eg, HRRT), BBR may still be better. But for data with a PSF of around 6mm or higher, I would go with coreg.

BBR remains the method of choice for all MRI volumes.

doug

On 11/1/16 10:21 AM, Schwarz, Christopher G., Ph.D. wrote:

Dr. Greve,

I noticed on https://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/PetSurfer https://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/PetSurfer that you’re recommending mri_coreg instead of bbregister for PET-MRI alignment in PETSurfer. This seems inconsistent with your 2014 NeuroImage paper http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811913012251 “BBR is very robust with respect to image artifacts and so an ideal candidate for PET-MR registration”

Has your position on BBR for PET-MRI changed? Was mri_coreg later found to be more robust?

Thank you for your time,

Christopher Schwarz

*--*

*Christopher G. Schwarz, Ph.D.*| Research Associate, Diagnostic Radiology | Opus Center for Advanced Imaging Research | 507-538-4867 | schwarz.christopher@mayo.edu mailto:schwarz.christopher@mayo.edu

*Mayo Clinic*| 200 First Street SW | Rochester, MN 55905 | http://mayoclinic.org http://mayoclinic.org/