Cited by 574Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications

The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 126 of the 126 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 84 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Diffusion MRI fiber tractography of the brain

Open access

Abstract

The ability of fiber tractography to delineate non-invasively the white matter fiber pathways of the brain raises possibilities for clinical applications and offers enormous potential for neuroscience. In the last decade, fiber tracking has become the method of choice to investigate quantitative MRI parameters in specific bundles of white matter. For neurosurgeons, it is quickly becoming an invaluable tool for the planning of surgery, allowing for visualization and localization of important white matter pathways before and even during surgery. Fiber tracking has also claimed a central role in the field of "connectomics," a technique that builds and studies comprehensive maps of the complex network of connections within the brain, and to which significant resources have been allocated worldwide. Despite its unique abilities and exciting applications, fiber tracking is not without controversy, in particular when it comes to its interpretation. As neuroscientists are eager to study the brain's connectivity, the quantification of tractography-derived "connection strengths" between distant brain regions is becoming increasingly popular. However, this practice is often frowned upon by fiber-tracking experts. In light of this controversy, this paper provides an overview of the key concepts of tractography, the technical considerations at play, and the different types of tractography algorithm, as well as the common misconceptions and mistakes that surround them. We also highlight the ongoing challenges related to fiber tracking. While recent methodological developments have vastly increased the biological accuracy of fiber tractograms, one should be aware that, even with state-of-the-art techniques, many issues that severely bias the resulting structural "connectomes" remain unresolved.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This review explains diffusion MRI fiber tractography, its technical steps, algorithm families, and common misinterpretations. It argues that tractography is valuable for qualitative white matter delineation but remains severely limited for quantitative connectivity and connectomics, even with state-of-the-art methods.

Key findings

  • DTI-based tractography remains dominant in clinical neurosurgery: roughly 98% of 160 neurosurgical tractography studies reported DTI-based tractography, despite growing consensus that it should be deprecated in favor of higher-order models.
  • Tractography is biased toward short, straight, simple trajectories; long, curving, or complex-fiber tracks are more likely to terminate prematurely, and whole-brain seeding overrepresents long bundles while underrepresenting short ones.
  • In the ISMRM 2015 Tractography Challenge, 96 tractograms from 21 international groups contained on average four false-positive bundles for every valid bundle recovered.
  • Practical resolution limits remain: clinical whole-brain diffusion MRI is limited to at best 2 mm³, angular resolution levels off around b = 3000 s/mm² with as few as 45 unique gradient orientations, and inter-fiber angles below 30° are rarely resolved.

Methods

  • Narrative review of diffusion MRI fiber tractography, covering key concepts, terminology, local fiber orientation estimation, integration, interpolation, seeding, stopping criteria, virtual dissection, and algorithm families.
  • No primary empirical sample is analyzed; the paper synthesizes prior literature and cites examples including 160 neurosurgical tractography studies, the ISMRM 2015 Tractography Challenge, simulation studies, and Human Connectome Project data.
  • Main analysis is conceptual and technical: it compares deterministic vs probabilistic, local vs global, and streamline vs filtering/shortest-path approaches, and discusses common misconceptions about quantification.

Limitations

  • The authors state their focus on challenges and limitations may appear pessimistic, but they intend it as a reflection on intrinsic tractography limitations and inspiration for next-generation algorithms.
  • The paper notes that even advanced higher-order models are simplified approximations whose assumptions may not always hold, and that global methods rely on stochastic optimization without guaranteed convergence to a globally optimal solution.
  • Evident from the text: this is a review, not a systematic meta-analysis or primary validation study; it also focuses on brain white matter tractography, with non-brain fibrous tissues mentioned only briefly.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/nbm.3785

Cites

126 of 126 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 84 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 80 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 49
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 18
59 of 59
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    When a number of nerve fibers align along a common orientation, the diffusion of water molecules is hindered to a greater extent across this orientation than along it.

    “These models all rely on one fundamental assumption: when a number of nerve fibers align themselves along a common orientation, the diffusion of water molecules will be hindered to a greater extent across this orientation than along it.3”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Connection strength directly relates to the proportion of white matter fibers connecting different regions, with regions connected by a larger proportion of fibers deemed more strongly connected.

    “While there are many possible definitions of connection strength, one typically assumes that it directly relates to the proportion of white matter fibers connecting different regions, with regions that are connected by a larger proportion of fibers deemed to be more strongly connected.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Fiber densities and/or axon diameters remain consistent along their trajectory.

    “For example, by assuming that fiber densities and/or axon diameters remain consistent along their trajectory, one can potentially disambiguate e.g.crossing and kissing fibers (assuming that each of the interacting fiber bundles exhibits a significantly distinct microstructural signature).”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Each of the interacting fiber bundles exhibits a significantly distinct microstructural signature.

    “For example, by assuming that fiber densities and/or axon diameters remain consistent along their trajectory, one can potentially disambiguate e.g.crossing and kissing fibers (assuming that each of the interacting fiber bundles exhibits a significantly distinct microstructural signature).”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Water molecules are most likely to diffuse along the fiber orientation, but diffusion along other, even perpendicular, orientations is still common.

    “Although water molecules are most likely to diffuse along the fiber orientation, diffusion along other, even perpendicular, orientations is still common.”
5 of 5

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 119 references

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Dell'Acqua F, Reconstructing fiber orientations with diffusion MRI, NMR Biomed
  2. Bells S, 2011, Tractometry—comprehensive multi‐modal quantitative assessment of white matter along specific tracts, Proc Int Soc Magn Reson Med, 19, 678
  3. Basser PJ, 1998, Fiber‐tractography via diffusion tensor MRI (DT‐MRI), Proc Int Soc Magn Reson Med, 6, 1226
  4. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.05.002 · DOI
  5. Farquharson S, 2013, Beyond Diffusion Tensor Imaging Response
  6. Holdsworth SJ, Pulse sequences and hardware considerations for brain diffusion MRI, NMR Biomed

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 501–572 of 572

Metadata

Authors
Jeurissen, B., Descoteaux, M., Mori, S., & Leemans, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Antwerp (BE)
  • Université de Sherbrooke (CA)
  • Kennedy Krieger Institute (US)
  • Utrecht University (NL)
Corresponding author
Jeurissen, Ben
Venue
NMR in Biomedicine
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-09-25
Volume
32
Issue
4
Pages
e3785-e3785
ISSN
  • 0952-3480 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1492
OpenAlex
W2758113150
Cited by
574
References
119
Citations by year
2026: 63 · 2025: 84 · 2024: 72 · 2023: 70 · 2022: 75 · 2021: 78 · 2020: 64 · 2019: 42 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 2
FWCI
25.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • NMR in Biomedicine (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (12M3116N)
  • Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (VIDI Grant 639.072.411)
  • Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (Discovery Grant)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Keywords
diffusion MRI, fiber tractography, connectomics, structural connectome, neurosurgical planning, structural bias
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Brain, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Terminology as Topic, Diffusion Tensor Imaging, Connectome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-18, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-18 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review