Dear David,
did you use
-uselongbasewmedits
in your recon-all -long run?
If this flag is not used, the wm edits are transfered to long from cross, not
from the base.
Regards,
Antonin Skoch
Andrew, thanks for your response. I am still not seeing the white matter edit
performance that I am expecting, or that I have seen from using the cross
stream on 5.3 in the past with a different dataset.I started with a new subject
with two timepoints. I ran recon-all on both for
the cross stream with no edits, and then ran the base. I edited the wm.mgz for
the base, then ran “recon-all –autorecon2-wm –autorecon3 –base xx_base –tp
xx_t1 –tp xx_t2”. I noticed the surfaces didn’t really change in the base, but
I went ahead and ran the two long runs using “recon-all –all –long xx_tx
xx_base” and although there are minor differences in the base and time point
surfaces, the white matter edits I did on the base were largely ignored, and
none of them were included in the time point long run wm.mgz files.
I am tempted to try these same analyses using Linux (I am running this on OSX
10.11 currently), as I experienced a completely different response from the
surface generation modules to my edits in the past when using Linux. I’m
thinking this is a real long shot, but I cannot otherwise figure out why the
software would be behaving so differently from my past experiences.
Any thoughts? Thanks!
Best,
David P. Semanek, HCISPP
Research Technician, Posner Lab
Division of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
Columbia University Medical Center
New York State Psychiatric Institute
1051 Riverside Drive, Pardes Bldg. Rm. 2424
New York, NY 10032
PH: (646) 774-5885
IMPORTANT NOTICE: This e-mail is meant only for the use of the intended
recipient. It may contain confidential information which is legally privileged
or otherwise protected by law. If you received this e-mail in error or from
someone who was not authorized to send it to you, you are strictly prohibited
from reviewing, using, disseminating, distributing or copying the e-mail.
PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY OF THE ERROR BY RETURN E-MAIL AND DELETE THIS
MESSAGE FROM YOUR SYSTEM. Thank you for your cooperation.
From: "Hoopes, Andrew" <ahoo...@mgh.harvard.edu>
Date: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 at 12:47 PM
To: Freesurfer support list <freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>, David Semanek
<seman...@nyspi.columbia.edu>
Cc: Bruce Fischl <fis...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] wm.mgz Edits Ignored With Current Dataset in FS 5.3/6
Cross and Long Streams
Hi David
Try editing the base wm.mgz first instead of editing the long and cross wm
files. Rerun autorecon2-wm and autorecon3 for the base dir, then completely
rerun the longitudinals. The long surfaces are initialized from the base
surfaces, so this could be why your wm fixes seem to have no effect.
You can find more info here:
https://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/LongitudinalEdits#CheatSheet<https://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/LongitudinalEdits>
If editing the base doesn't solve the problem, you can send me the commands you
ran in order and I can look into this further.
best,
Andrew
________________________________
From: freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
<freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> on behalf of David Semanek
<seman...@nyspi.columbia.edu>
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 11:55 AM
To: Bruce Fischl; Freesurfer support list
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] wm.mgz Edits Ignored With Current Dataset in FS 5.3/6
Cross and Long Streams
Thanks, I have uploaded the cross and long stream processing from one subject
which requires numerous white matter edits to correct defects in the white
matter surfaces; the file is on the ftp server as dsemanek.zip.
Both of the cross subject folders, s02_t1 and s02_t2 have had edits done to
both the brainmask as well as the wm files, and autorecon2-wm and autorecon-3
have been run on them, as well as the long folder for the first time point,
s02_t1.long.s02_base.
It was in working with the rerun results of s02_t1.long.s02_base that I noticed
the white matter surfaces after being regenerated with the edited wm.mgz did
not reflect any of the edits. The easiest way to see this is to load the wm.mgz
with the white matter surfaces and scroll through the slices, there are
numerous areas where the contours of the white matter surfaces do not follow
the voxels of the wm.mgz volume, mostly near what should be identified as
hyperintense gray matter. I’m fairly certain the white matter surfaces didn’t
change at all after running autorecon2-wm with the wm.mgz edits.
Thanks for taking a look at our data.
Best,
David P. Semanek, HCISPP
Research Technician, Posner Lab
Division of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
Columbia University Medical Center
New York State Psychiatric Institute
1051 Riverside Drive, Pardes Bldg. Rm. 2424
New York, NY 10032
PH: (646) 774-5885
IMPORTANT NOTICE: This e-mail is meant only for the use of the intended
recipient. It may contain confidential information which is legally privileged
or otherwise protected by law. If you received this e-mail in error or from
someone who was not authorized to send it to you, you are strictly prohibited
from reviewing, using, disseminating, distributing or copying the e-mail.
PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY OF THE ERROR BY RETURN E-MAIL AND DELETE THIS
MESSAGE FROM YOUR SYSTEM. Thank you for your cooperation.
On 3/12/17, 4:13 PM, "Bruce Fischl" <fis...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> wrote:
Hi David
if you upload a subject to our ftp site and give us enough detail to
replicate what you tried we will take a look
cheers
Bruce
On Fri, 10 Mar 2017, David
Semanek wrote:
>
> Hello, I have worked quite a bit in the past with fs 5.3 on datasets which
> required a fair number of manual edits to the white matter volume in order
> to correct defects in the white matter surface. Typically, these edits
take
> the form of removing voxels in the wm.mgz volume that have been
incorrectly
> identified as white matter, usually near the pial surface caused by
> intensity artifacts resulting from motion. My experience in the past is
that
> generating the white matter surface after edits to the wm.mgz volume will
> reliably change the geometry of the resulting surfaces.
>
>
>
> However, on my current dataset, 1.5T adolescent brains with pervasive
motion
> artifacts that do not meet the threshold for unusable data, absolutely no
> intervention I have done on the wm.mgz volume has any impact at all on the
> generation of the white matter surfaces. I am really very puzzled by this.
> All of the files that result from wm.mgz reflect the edits, however the
aseg
> does not.
>
>
>
> The resulting white matter surfaces always follow the aseg white matter
> definitions and never the wm.mgz edits. I feel as if there might be
> something I am missing but this protocol has reliably been used to do
white
> matter edits in the past. I thought it may be an issue with fs 6 or the
long
> stream, but I have tried the same edits in 5.3, 6, long and cross streams
> and nothing at all has worked.
>
>
>
> Does anyone have any suggestions, or perhaps a hint that I am overlooking
> something common?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
_______________________________________________
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.