Elsevier

NeuroImage

Volume 93, Part 2, June 2014, Pages 176-188
NeuroImage

Review
Using high-resolution quantitative mapping of R1 as an index of cortical myelination

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.06.005Get rights and content

Highlights

  • We present an overview of high-resolution quantitative R1 (1/T1) mapping techniques.

  • High R1 cortical areas colocalize with functionally defined highly myelinated areas.

  • In-vivo R1 maps give promising insights into individual anatomical differences.

Abstract

A fundamental tenet of neuroscience is that cortical functional differentiation is related to the cross-areal differences in cyto-, receptor-, and myeloarchitectonics that are observed in ex-vivo preparations. An ongoing challenge is to create noninvasive magnetic resonance (MR) imaging techniques that offer sufficient resolution, tissue contrast, accuracy and precision to allow for characterization of cortical architecture over an entire living human brain. One exciting development is the advent of fast, high-resolution quantitative mapping of basic MR parameters that reflect cortical myeloarchitecture. Here, we outline some of the theoretical and technical advances underlying this technique, particularly in terms of measuring and correcting for transmit and receive radio frequency field inhomogeneities. We also discuss new directions in analytic techniques, including higher resolution reconstructions of the cortical surface. We then discuss two recent applications of this technique. The first compares individual and group myelin maps to functional retinotopic maps in the same individuals, demonstrating a close relationship between functionally and myeloarchitectonically defined areal boundaries (as well as revealing an interesting disparity in a highly studied visual area). The second combines tonotopic and myeloarchitectonic mapping to localize primary auditory areas in individual healthy adults, using a similar strategy as combined electrophysiological and post-mortem myeloarchitectonic studies in non-human primates.

Introduction

A basic goal in neuroscience is to map out the functional landscape of cerebral cortical areas identified by structural characteristics (cyto- and myeloarchitecture — Clarke and Miklossy, 1990, Flechsig, 1920, Förster, 1934, Hopf, 1951, Hopf, 1955, Smith, 1907, Vogt, 1906, von Economo and Koskinas, 1925), response preferences, or sensory or motor mapping (Zilles and Amunts, 2010). Identifying homologous areas across species helps us understand how areal function itself has evolved (cf., reptilian jaw bones evolving into inner ear ossicles in mammals). In humans, in-vivo identification of cortical areas generally relies on fMRI mapping of representations of the sensory surfaces (e.g., retinotopy/cochleotopy/somatotopy), motor effectors, or higher level equivalents (attention-o-topy, intention-o-topy). This has been an extremely productive approach, and has shown that much of the cortex is tiled with maps (Graziano and Aflalo, 2007, Schreiner and Winer, 2007, Wandell et al., 2007). These maps not only tend to have a generally consistent location and orientation on the cortical sheet, but also show non-trivial individual differences in size, shape, and possibly even neighbor relations (Sereno and Tootell, 2005) that may have interesting functional consequences (Schwarzkopf et al., 2011).

However, identifying cortical areas through sensory and motor mapping is time consuming; it takes an hour to accurately map one modality (e.g., polar angle and eccentricity mapping to establish visual areas). The robustness, reliability, and extent of maps are strongly dependent upon the participant's level of directed attention to the stimulus over this long period of scanning (Saygin and Sereno, 2008, Silver and Kastner, 2009) making mapping more difficult in children, elderly, and clinical populations. Some cortical areas cannot be defined on the basis of functional maps alone (e.g., primary auditory areas A1 & R — (Dick et al., 2012, Hackett, 2011). And in some individuals (e.g., auditory areas in the deaf (Karns et al., 2012, Ressel et al., 2012), visual areas in the blind, and somatomotor areas in participants with hemiparesis, deafferentation, or amputations), defining inputs or outputs may be absent.

One means of estimating an individual participant's cortical areas is by probabilistic, postmortem cytoarchitectonic atlases, which are provided in a standard anatomical MRI volume or MRI-based cortical surface space (through affine or non-linear transformations (Eickhoff et al., 2005, Fischl et al., 1999, Tahmasebi et al., 2009). This requires no additional scanning time, can define a large number of cortical areas at once (12 Brodmann areas are defined in the current Freesurfer distribution), and facilitates easy comparisons across experiments, scanner sites, and labs. Unfortunately, the degree of inter-individual variation in areal size and shape is considerable (with three-fold areal differences even in V1 — (Schwarzkopf et al., 2011)), making precise definition of any area – particularly smaller and more variable ones – very challenging. This is of particular concern when localizing areas for surgical implantation (e.g., neurostimulators, drug delivery vehicles, or electrode recording grids) or excision (e.g., temporal lobectomy).

A better solution would be to use the signal and tissue contrast information in the MRI anatomical volume itself to identify an individual participant's cortical areas. Indeed, over the last decade much progress has been made in mapping individual cortical areas in-vivo by taking advantage of the sensitivity of the MR longitudinal relaxation time T1 to myelin content, an in-vivo assay of myeloarchitecture (Barazany and Assaf, 2012, Bock et al., 2009, Bock et al., 2013, Clark et al., 1992, Dick et al., 2012, Geyer et al., 2011, Glasser and Van Essen, 2011, Sánchez-Panchuelo et al., 2012, Sereno et al., in press, Sigalovsky et al., 2006, Walters et al., 2003). These myelin mapping methods use different combinations of high resolution images, including high-resolution proton-density (Clark et al., 1992), T1-weighted images (Barazany and Assaf, 2012, Walters et al., 2003), T2-weighted images (Trampel et al., 2011) and volumes derived by taking a ratio of T1- and T2-weighted volumes (Glasser and Van Essen, 2011), synthetic, high-contrast images derived from multi-angle FLASH (Hinds et al., 2008), and quantitative R1 (1/T1) images (Dick et al., 2012, Sereno et al., in press, Sigalovsky et al., 2006).

The recent achievements illustrating the advent of in-vivo histological studies are notable given the technical challenges posed. First, the degree of cortical myelination is strongly cortical-layer-dependent (for examples, see Annese et al., 2004, Braitenberg, 1962). Thus, MRI scans must be of sufficiently high resolution to resolve laminar differences to some degree. Second, interareal differences in myelination are comparable in magnitude to the differences in myelination across layers; upper layers of cortex are often quite lightly myelinated (see whole-brain-slice Gallyas stain of macaque, shown in Fig. 2 of Bridge et al., 2014). Therefore, even minor local inaccuracies in cortical surface reconstruction can significantly distort or obscure estimates of areal differences in myelination. Third, because of the subtlety of the cross-areal differences in myelination, even fairly gentle spatial biases in overall signal intensity and contrast can swamp myelin-related signal changes. In particular, transmit-field (B1+) inhomogeneities affect image contrast and can bedevil widely applied post-hoc histogram-based normalization methods (e.g. Dale et al., 1999) and also ratio methods based on normalizing scans (Glasser and Van Essen, 2011). Myelin mapping methods that combine different kinds of scans must also often contend with vessel artifacts and local spatial distortion that differ between scan types. (However, such ratio-based methods have the advantage of potentially broader application as they rely on widely-available clinical pulse sequences).

In addition to the need for high resolution and spatially unbiased data for myelin mapping, it would be very useful to be able to measure differences in myelination in the same area either over different subjects, or over time in the same subject. However this is not possible with cortical myelination measurements derived from post-hoc normalized contrast-weighted images or from image ratios, in that their numerical values are inherently arbitrary, and unstable even on a single scanner. The ability to make quantitative cross-scan, cross-individual, and cross-site comparisons of cortical myelination would allow for the establishment of norms across development, populations and disease stages (e.g., in multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer's disease and focal dystonias).

To address these challenges, we have developed and refined a method for measuring cortical myelination that takes advantage of recent advances in high-resolution, quantitative MR imaging. Here, we first lay out in some detail the underlying theory and recent advances in MR physics that made high resolution quantitative imaging possible, and discuss the advantages and drawbacks of different quantitative imaging schemes. We then present results from several initial studies using these techniques to measure cortical myelination in visual (Sereno et al., in press) and auditory areas (Dick et al., 2012).

Section snippets

Myelin mapping using R1 mapping methods

T1 is the time constant governing the recovery of the longitudinal component of the magnetization following radio-frequency (RF) excitation, and crucially, an MR parameter closely related to tissue myelination (Koenig et al., 1990) and in particular, the cholesterol that is bound to myelin (Koenig, 1991). Ex-vivo studies using white matter slices from patients with multiple sclerosis or controls have directly compared quantitative MRI measurements of these slices with microscopic

Beyond R1 mapping — challenges for quantitative mapping techniques

Large discrepancies exist between R1 estimates obtained from different methods (Cheng and Wright, 2006, Clare and Jezzard, 2001, Deoni, 2007, Deoni et al., 2005, Ethofer et al., 2003, Gelman et al., 2001, Preibisch and Deichmann, 2009, Wansapura et al., 1999, Wright et al., 2008, Zhu and Penn, 2005). Such differences might in part be due to imperfect correction of B1+-inhomogeneities (as noted above), partial volume effects between different tissue types at low image resolutions, and of

Adapting existing processing pipelines to better but different input data

As cortical surface reconstruction processing pipelines have been made more robust, they have at the same time become more sensitive to and reliant upon the exact statistics of typical T1-weighted input images. Thus, even though quantitative R1 maps are intrinsically preferable to T1-weighted images because the image intensity at each voxel is much more closely correlated with underlying tissue properties, they are more difficult to reconstruct using a pipeline highly optimized for T1-weighted

Cortical myelination and visual areas

Our first study compared R1 maps and retinotopic maps in visual cortex using surface-based methods (Sereno et al., in press). As an initial verification of the technique, we measured six participants' averaged R1 values (sampled at 8 depths in each area) in three probabilistically-defined regions-of-interest (ROIs) known to differ in myelination density — namely the angular gyrus, which is lightly myelinated, and visual areas MT and V1, which are highly myelinated (see Fig. 2a).

First, we found

Conclusion

Recent in-vivo histological studies using quantitative MRI have demonstrated the validity of the MR parameter R1 as a biomarker for myelin concentration. The subtle changes in R1 across the cortical surface require specially-dedicated MR pulse sequences that allow for accurate, precise and efficient image acquisition with sufficient image resolution to resolve the laminar distribution of the cortical layer. We demonstrated that high-resolution R1 mapping could be used for the in-vivo

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References (135)

  • R. Fleysher et al.

    TriTone: a radiofrequency field (B1)-insensitive T1 estimator for MRI at high magnetic fields

    Magn. Reson. Imaging

    (2008)
  • A.J. Freeman et al.

    Optimisation of the ultra-fast Look–Locker echo-planar imaging T1 mapping sequence

    Magn. Reson. Med.

    (1998)
  • G.H. Glover et al.

    Comparison of linear and circular polarization for magnetic resonance imaging

    J. Magn. Reson.

    (1985)
  • M.S. Graziano et al.

    Mapping behavioral repertoire onto the cortex

    Neuron

    (2007)
  • A. Haase et al.

    Flash imaging — rapid NMR imaging using low flip-angle pulses

    J. Magn. Reson.

    (1986)
  • T.A. Hackett

    Information flow in the auditory cortical network

    Hear. Res.

    (2011)
  • G. Helms et al.

    Improved segmentation of deep brain grey matter structures using magnetization transfer (MT) parameter maps

    NeuroImage

    (2009)
  • E. Henderson et al.

    A fast 3D Look–Locker method for volumetric T1 mapping

    Magn. Reson. Imaging

    (1999)
  • J. Homer et al.

    Driven-equilibrium single-pulse observation of T1 relaxation — a reevaluation of a rapid new method for determining NMR spin–lattice relaxation-times

    J. Magn. Reson.

    (1985)
  • J. Homer et al.

    Conditions for the driven equilibrium single pulse observation of spin–lattice relaxation-times

    J. Magn. Reson.

    (1987)
  • C. Hutton et al.

    Image distortion correction in fMRI: a quantitative evaluation

    NeuroImage

    (2002)
  • E.K. Insko et al.

    Mapping of the radiofrequency field

    J. Magn. Reson. A

    (1993)
  • M. Jankiewicz et al.

    Improved encoding pulses for Bloch–Siegert B1+ mapping

    J. Magn. Reson.

    (2013)
  • C. Lambert et al.

    Confirmation of functional zones within the human subthalamic nucleus: patterns of connectivity and sub-parcellation using diffusion weighted imaging

    NeuroImage

    (2012)
  • J.V. Liu et al.

    Rapid high-resolution three-dimensional mapping of T1 and age-dependent variations in the non-human primate using magnetization-prepared rapid gradient-echo (MPRAGE) sequence

    NeuroImage

    (2011)
  • A. MacKay et al.

    Insights into brain microstructure from the T2 distribution

    Magn. Reson. Imaging

    (2006)
  • J.P. Marques et al.

    Exploring cortical cytoarchitecture in high resolution R1 maps

  • J.P. Marques et al.

    MP2RAGE, a self bias-field corrected sequence for improved segmentation and T1-mapping at high field

    NeuroImage

    (2010)
  • P. Morosan et al.

    Human primary auditory cortex: cytoarchitectonic subdivisions and mapping into a spatial reference system

    NeuroImage

    (2001)
  • C.E. Schreiner et al.

    Auditory cortex mapmaking: principles, projections, and plasticity

    Neuron

    (2007)
  • J.F. Baker et al.

    Visual response properties of neurons in four extrastriate visual areas of the owl monkey (Aotus trivirgatus): a quantitative comparison of medial, dorsomedial, dorsolateral, and middle temporal areas

    J. Neurophysiol.

    (1981)
  • D. Barazany et al.

    Visualization of cortical lamination patterns with magnetic resonance imaging

    Cereb. Cortex

    (2012)
  • S. Bok

    Der Einfluß der in den Furchen und Windungen auftretenden Krümmungen der Großhirnrinde auf die Rindenarchitektur

    Z. Gesamte Neurol. Psychiatr.

    (1929)
  • V. Braitenberg

    A note on myeloarchitectonics

    J. Comp. Neurol.

    (1962)
  • S. Chavez et al.

    A novel method for simultaneous 3D B1 and T1 mapping: the method of slopes (MoS)

    NMR Biomed.

    (2012)
  • H.L. Cheng et al.

    Rapid high-resolution T(1) mapping by variable flip angles: accurate and precise measurements in the presence of radiofrequency field inhomogeneity

    Magn. Reson. Med.

    (2006)
  • S. Chung et al.

    Rapid B1+ mapping using a preconditioning RF pulse with TurboFLASH readout

    Magn. Reson. Med.

    (2010)
  • S. Clare et al.

    Rapid T(1) mapping using multislice echo planar imaging

    Magn. Reson. Med.

    (2001)
  • V.P. Clark et al.

    In vivo myeloarchitectonic analysis of human striate and extrastriate cortex using magnetic resonance imaging

    Cereb. Cortex

    (1992)
  • S. Clarke et al.

    Occipital cortex in man: organization of callosal connections, related myelo- and cytoarchitecture, and putative boundaries of functional visual areas

    J. Comp. Neurol.

    (1990)
  • C.H. Cunningham et al.

    Saturated double-angle method for rapid B-1 plus mapping

    Magn. Reson. Med.

    (2006)
  • R. Deichmann

    Fast high-resolution T1 mapping of the human brain

    Magn. Reson. Med.

    (2005)
  • R. Deichmann et al.

    Fast T1 mapping on a whole-body scanner

    Magn. Reson. Med.

    (1999)
  • S.C. Deoni

    High-resolution T1 mapping of the brain at 3 T with driven equilibrium single pulse observation of T1 with high-speed incorporation of RF field inhomogeneities (DESPOT1-HIFI)

    J. Magn. Reson. Imaging

    (2007)
  • S.C.L. Deoni et al.

    Rapid combined T-1 and T-2 mapping using gradient recalled acquisition in the steady state

    Magn. Reson. Med.

    (2003)
  • S.C.L. Deoni et al.

    High-resolution T-1 and T-2 mapping of the brain in a clinically acceptable time with DESPOT1 and DESPOT2

    Magn. Reson. Med.

    (2005)
  • F. Dick et al.

    In vivo functional and myeloarchitectonic mapping of human primary auditory areas

    J. Neurosci.

    (2012)
  • F. Eggenschwiler et al.

    SA2RAGE: a new sequence for fast B1+ mapping

    Magn. Reson. Med.

    (2012)
  • T. Ethofer et al.

    Comparison of longitudinal metabolite relaxation times in different regions of the human brain at 1.5 and 3 Tesla

    Magn. Reson. Med.

    (2003)
  • B. Fischl et al.

    High-resolution intersubject averaging and a coordinate system for the cortical surface

    Hum. Brain Mapp.

    (1999)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text