[Mne_analysis] MPRAGE vs multi-echo FLASH

[Alexandre Gramfort]

        External Email - Use Caution        

I would do the simulation myself using sample dataset for which you
have a watershed and a flash bem model you can use.

You simulate with flash bem and do dipole fits using watershed bem and
you see what is the histogram of localization errors.

Alex

On Mon, Dec 31, 2018 at 6:07 PM Mikołaj Magnuski <mmagnuski at swps.edu.pl> wrote:
>
>         External Email - Use Caution
>
> Thanks Alex,
>
> I am also looking for some references or opinions with respect to the gain in source localization accuracy/correctness when adding FLASH to normal T1 MPRAGE. Especially if one has only EEG with a modest number of channels (64). I am wondering if adding FLASH, which is much longer than MPRAGE, does make a noticeable difference in such a scenario.
> Any suggestions and opinions would be greatly welcome.
>
> Mikołaj
>
> niedz., 30 gru 2018 o 12:09 Alexandre Gramfort <alexandre.gramfort at inria.fr> napisał(a):
>>
>>         External Email - Use Caution
>>
>> Hi Mikołaj,
>>
>> a proper T1 MPRAGE is mandatory to segment the cortex and to see over which
>> region in the brain you have activation.
>>
>> the Flash images are a bonus if you want to have a fine segmentation
>> of the skull
>> surface for more accurate forward modeling.
>>
>> HTH
>> Alex
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 7:21 PM Mikołaj Magnuski <mmagnuski at swps.edu.pl> wrote:
>> >
>> >         External Email - Use Caution
>> >
>> > Hi everyone,
>> >
>> > I am looking for some references and advice on differences between MPRAGE and multi-echo FLASH MRI sequences. My understanding is that both are useful for EEG source reconstruction because FLASH is better at reconstructing skull boundaries and MPRANGE is better at reconstructing the cortex, but I couldn't find any particular info on that, so please correct me if I'm wrong.
>> >
>> > And a follow-up question: I undrestand that it is best to have both MPRANGE and FLASH images, but if one had to pick just one which would be better overall for EEG source reconstruction?
>> >
>> > thanks,
>> > Mikołaj Magnuski
>> >
>> > ________________________________
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Mne_analysis mailing list
>> > Mne_analysis at nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
>> > https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/mne_analysis
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mne_analysis mailing list
>> Mne_analysis at nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
>> https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/mne_analysis
>
>
> ________________________________
> _______________________________________________
> Mne_analysis mailing list
> Mne_analysis at nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
> https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/mne_analysis