Advertisement

Brain Structure and Function

, Volume 224, Issue 9, pp 3373–3385 | Cite as

White-matter microstructural properties of the corpus callosum: test–retest and repositioning effects in two parcellation schemes

  • Chaitali Anand
  • Andreas M. Brandmaier
  • Muzamil Arshad
  • Jonathan Lynn
  • Jeffrey A. StanleyEmail author
  • Naftali RazEmail author
Original Article

Abstract

We investigated test–retest reliability of two MRI-derived indices of white-matter microstructural properties in the human corpus callosum (CC): myelin water fraction (MWF) and geometric mean T2 relaxation time of intra/extracellular water (geomT2IEW), using a 3D gradient and multi spin-echo sequence in 20 healthy adults (aged 24–69 years, 10 men). For each person, we acquired two back-to-back acquisitions in a single session, and the third after a break and repositioning the participant in the scanner. We assessed the contribution of session-related variance to reliability, using intra-class effect decomposition (ICED) while comparing two CC parcellation schemes that divided the CC into five and ten regions. We found high construct-level reliability of MWF and geomT2IEW in all regions of both schemes, except the posterior body—a slender region with a smaller number of large myelinated fibers. Only in that region, we observed significant session-specific variance in the MWF, interpreted as an effect of repositioning in the scanner. The geomT2IEW demonstrated higher reliability than MWF across both parcellation schemes and all CC regions. Thus, in both CC parcellation approaches, MWF and geomT2IEW have good test–retest reliability and are, therefore, suitable for longitudinal investigations in healthy adults. However, the five-region scheme appears more appropriate for MWF, whereas both schemes are suitable for geomT2IEW studies. Given the lower reliability in the posterior body, which may reflect sensitivity to the repositioning of the participant in the scanner, caution should be exercised in interpreting differential findings in that region.

Keywords

Myelin T2 spin-spin relaxation time MRI Reliability Commissural fibers Multi-echo imaging 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health grants F31-AG058420-01 (CA), R01-AG011230 (NR) and R21-AG059160 (JAS and NR), and by the Lycaki-Young Funds from the State of Michigan. We thank Dalal Khatib, Caroline Zajac-Benitez, Cheryl Dahle, and Matthew Hilton for technical support and assistance in data collection.

Author contributions

NR, AB, JS, and CA conceptualized the study. CA, NR, and JS drafted the manuscript. CA analyzed the data and designed the figures. AB developed the statistical model and supervised the statistical analyses. MA collected and processed the MRI data. JS, JL, and CA processed the MRI data. NR secured the funding. All authors contributed to editing multiple drafts of the manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This study contains an extended analysis of the MRI data that were previously collected by our group. Non-overlapping analyses have been published in Arshad et al. (2017) and Brandmaier et al. (2018). The data collection was conducted following the protocol approved by the Wayne State University Institutional Review Board, in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki (1964).

Informed consent

All participants provided informed consent.

Supplementary material

429_2019_1981_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (547 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 546 kb)
429_2019_1981_MOESM2_ESM.docx (29 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (DOCX 29 kb)

References

  1. Aboitiz F, Montiel J (2003) One hundred million years of interhemispheric communication: the history of the corpus callosum. Braz J Med Biol Res 36(4):409–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aboitiz F, Scheibel AB, Fisher RS, Zaidel E (1992a) Fiber composition of the human corpus callosum. Brain Res 598(1–2):143–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aboitiz F, Scheibel AB, Fisher RS, Zaidel E (1992b) Individual differences in brain asymmetries and fiber composition in the human corpus callosum. Brain Res 598(1–2):154–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aboitiz F, Rodriguez E, Olivares R, Zaidel E (1996) Age-related changes in fibre composition of the human corpus callosum: sex differences. NeuroReport 7(11):1761–1764CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Alonso-Ortiz E, Levesque IR, Pike GB (2015) MRI-based myelin water imaging: a technical review. Magn Reson Med 73(1):70–81.  https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.25198 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Arshad M, Stanley JA, Raz N (2016) Adult age differences in subcortical myelin content are consistent with protracted myelination and unrelated to diffusion tensor imaging indices. Neuroimage 143:26–39.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.08.047 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Arshad M, Stanley JA, Raz N (2017) Test-retest reliability and concurrent validity of in vivo myelin content indices: myelin water fraction and calibrated T1 w/T2 w image ratio. Hum Brain Mapp 38(4):1780–1790.  https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.23481 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Bartzokis G (2004) Age-related myelin breakdown: a developmental model of cognitive decline and Alzheimer’s disease. Neurobiol Aging 25(1):5–18 (author reply 49-62) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Björnholm L, Nikkinen J, Kiviniemi V, Nordstrom T, Niemela S, Drakesmith M, Paus T (2017) Structural properties of the human corpus callosum: multimodal assessment and sex differences. Neuroimage 152:108–118.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.02.056 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Bowley MP, Cabral H, Rosene DL, Peters A (2010) Age changes in myelinated nerve fibers of the cingulate bundle and corpus callosum in the rhesus monkey. J Comp Neurol 518(15):3046–3064.  https://doi.org/10.1002/cne.22379 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Brandmaier AM, Wenger E, Bodammer NC, Kuhn S, Raz N, Lindenberger U (2018) Assessing reliability in neuroimaging research through intra-class effect decomposition (ICED). Elife.  https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.35718 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Clarke JM, Zaidel E (1994) Anatomical-behavioral relationships: corpus callosum morphometry and hemispheric specialization. Behav Brain Res 64(1–2):185–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cover GS, Herrera WG, Bento MP, Appenzeller S, Rittner L (2018) Computational methods for corpus callosum segmentation on MRI: a systematic literature review. Comput Methods Progr Biomed 154:25–35.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2017.10.025 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Curnes JT, Burger PC, Djang WT, Boyko OB (1988) MR imaging of compact white matter pathways. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 9(6):1061–1068PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. de Lacoste MC, Kirkpatrick JB, Ross ED (1985) Topography of the human corpus callosum. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol 44(6):578–591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Denenberg VH, Kertesz A, Cowell PE (1991) A factor analysis of the human’s corpus callosum. Brain Res 548(1–2):126–132.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0006-8993(91)91113-f CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Di Ieva A, Fathalla H, Cusimano MD, Tschabitscher M (2015) The indusium griseum and the longitudinal striae of the corpus callosum. Cortex 62:34–40.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2014.06.016 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Dula AN, Gochberg DF, Valentine HL, Valentine WM, Does MD (2010) Multiexponential T2, magnetization transfer, and quantitative histology in white matter tracts of rat spinal cord. Magn Reson Med 63(4):902–909.  https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.22267 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. Fabri M, Pierpaoli C, Barbaresi P, Polonara G (2014) Functional topography of the corpus callosum investigated by DTI and fMRI. World J Radiol 6(12):895–906.  https://doi.org/10.4329/wjr.v6.i12.895 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. Fine JG, Semrud-Clikeman M, Keith TZ, Stapleton LM, Hynd GW (2007) Reading and the corpus callosum: an MRI family study of volume and area. Neuropsychology 21(2):235–241.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0894-4105.21.2.235 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Flechsig, (1901) Developmental (myelogenetic) localisation of the cerebral cortex in the human subject. Lancet 2(1207):1021–1096Google Scholar
  22. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR (1975) Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 12(3):10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hofer S, Frahm J (2006) Topography of the human corpus callosum revisited–comprehensive fiber tractography using diffusion tensor magnetic resonance imaging. Neuroimage 32(3):989–994.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.05.044 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Hynd GW, Semrud-Clikeman M, Lorys AR, Novey ES, Eliopulos D, Lyytinen H (1991) Corpus callosum morphology in attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder: morphometric analysis of MRI. J Learn Disab 24:6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jenkinson M, Beckmann CF, Behrens TE, Woolrich MW, Smith SM (2012) Fsl Neuroimage 62(2):782–790.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.09.015 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Kaes (1907) Die Grosshirnrinde des Menschen in ihren Massen und in ihrem Fasergehalt. Ein Gehirnanatomischer Atlas. Gustav Fischer, JenaGoogle Scholar
  27. Karch JD, Filevich E, Wenger E, Lisofsky N, Becker M, Butler O, Kühn S (2019) Identifying predictors of within-person variance in MRI-based brain volume estimates. Neuroimage (in press)Google Scholar
  28. Khan IN (2012) Sex differences and the effects of sex hormones on the structure of the corpus callosum, Ph.D. Thesis. University of NottinghamGoogle Scholar
  29. Kim JH, Juraska JM (1997) Sex differences in the development of axon number in the splenium of the rat corpus callosum from postnatal day 15 through 60. Brain Res Dev Brain Res 102(1):77–85.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0165-3806(97)00080-1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Lamantia AS, Rakic P (1990) Cytological and quantitative characteristics of four cerebral commissures in the rhesus monkey. J Comp Neurol 291(4):520–537.  https://doi.org/10.1002/cne.902910404 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Lebel C, Gee M, Camicioli R, Wieler M, Martin W, Beaulieu C (2012) Diffusion tensor imaging of white matter tract evolution over the lifespan. Neuroimage 60(1):340–352.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.11.094 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Liem F, Merillat S, Bezzola L, Hirsiger S, Philipp M, Madhyastha T, Jäncke L (2015) Reliability and statistical power analysis of cortical and subcortical FreeSurfer metrics in a large sample of healthy elderly. Neuroimage 108:95–109.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.12.035 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. MacKay A, Whittall K, Adler J, Li D, Paty D, Graeb D (1994) In vivo visualization of myelin water in brain by magnetic resonance. Magn Reson Med 31(6):673–677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Madhyastha T, Merillat S, Hirsiger S, Bezzola L, Liem F, Grabowski T, Jäncke L (2014) Longitudinal reliability of tract-based spatial statistics in diffusion tensor imaging. Hum Brain Mapp 35(9):4544–4555.  https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.22493 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Menon RS, Allen PS (1991) Application of continuous relaxation time distributions to the fitting of data from model systems and excised tissue. Magn Reson Med 20(2):214–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Menon RS, Rusinko MS, Allen PS (1992) Proton relaxation studies of water compartmentalization in a model neurological system. Magn Reson Med 28(2):264–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Meyers SM, Vavasour IM, Madler B, Harris T, Fu E, Li DK, Laule C (2013) Multicenter measurements of myelin water fraction and geometric mean T2: intra- and intersite reproducibility. J Magn Reson Imaging 38(6):1445–1453.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.24106 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. O’Kusky J, Strauss E, Kosaka B (1988) The corpus callosum is larger with right-hemisphere cerebral speech dominance. Ann Neurol 24:4Google Scholar
  39. Pandya DN, Seltzer B (1986) The topography of commissural fibers. In: Leporé F, Ptito M, Jasper HH (eds) Two hemispheres-one brain: functions of the corpus callosum. Alan Liss, New York, pp 47–73Google Scholar
  40. Paus T, Collins DL, Evans AC, Leonard G, Pike B, Zijdenbos A (2001) Maturation of white matter in the human brain: a review of magnetic resonance studies. Brain Res Bull 54(3):255–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Peters A (2009) The effects of normal aging on myelinated nerve fibers in monkey central nervous system. Front Neuroanat 3:11.  https://doi.org/10.3389/neuro.05.011.2009 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. Peters M, Oeltze S, Seminowicz D, Steinmetz H, Koeneke S, Jäncke L (2002) Division of the corpus callosum into subregions. Brain Cognit 50:11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Radloff LS (1977) The CES-D scale: a self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Appl Psychol Meas 1(3):7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rajapakse JC, Giedd JN, Rumsey JM, Vaituzis AC, Hamburger SD, Rapoport JL (1996) Regional MRI measurements of the corpus callosum: a methodological and developmental study. Brain Dev 18(5):379–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rosseel (2012) lavaan: an R package for structural equation modeling. J Stat Softw 48:36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL (1979) Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 86(2):420–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tomasch J (1954) Size, distribution, and number of fibres in the human corpus callosum. Anat Rec 119(1):119–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. von Oertzen T, Brandmaier AM, Tsang S (2015) Structural equation modeling with Onyx. Struct Eq Model Multidiscip J 22:12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Weis S, Kimbacher M, Wenger E, Neuhold A (1993) Morphometric analysis of the corpus callosum using MR: correlation of measurements with aging in healthy individuals. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 14(3):637–645PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Whittall KP, MacKay AL, Li DK, Vavasour IM, Jones CK, Paty DW (2002) Normal-appearing white matter in multiple sclerosis has heterogeneous, diffusely prolonged T(2). Magn Reson Med 47(2):403–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Witelson SF (1989) Hand and sex differences in the isthmus and genu of the human corpus callosum. A postmortem morphological study. Brain 112(Pt 3):799–835CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Zhang Y, Brady M, Smith S (2001) Segmentation of brain MR images through a hidden Markov random field model and the expectation-maximization algorithm. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 20:45–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral NeurosciencesWayne State UniversityDetroitUSA
  2. 2.Institute of GerontologyWayne State UniversityDetroitUSA
  3. 3.Center for Lifespan PsychologyMax Planck Institute for Human DevelopmentBerlinGermany
  4. 4.Max Planck, UCL Centre for Computational Psychiatry and Ageing ResearchBerlinGermany
  5. 5.Max Planck, UCL Centre for Computational Psychiatry and Ageing ResearchLondonUK
  6. 6.Department of PsychologyWayne State UniversityDetroitUSA

Personalised recommendations