Robustness of Automated Methods for Brain Volume Measurements across Different MRI Field Strengths

Autor: Adriënne M. Mendrik, Max A. Viergever, Geert Jan Biessels, Jeroen de Bresser, Willem H. Bouvy, Rutger Heinen
Jazyk: angličtina
Rok vydání: 2016
Předmět:
Central Nervous System
Pathology
Physiology
lcsh:Medicine
Biochemistry
Nervous System
030218 nuclear medicine & medical imaging
Diagnostic Radiology
0302 clinical medicine
Medicine and Health Sciences
Image Processing
Computer-Assisted
Brain segmentation
Gray Matter
lcsh:Science
Musculoskeletal System
Cerebrospinal Fluid
Statistical Data
Medicine(all)
Aged
80 and over
Brain Diseases
Multidisciplinary
medicine.diagnostic_test
Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)
Cognitive Neurology
Radiology and Imaging
Brain
Organ Size
Middle Aged
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
White Matter
Body Fluids
Volume measurements
Multicenter Study
medicine.anatomical_structure
Neurology
Brain size
Physical Sciences
Anatomy
Statistics (Mathematics)
Research Article
Adult
medicine.medical_specialty
Imaging Techniques
Cognitive Neuroscience
Neuroimaging
Research and Analysis Methods
White matter
03 medical and health sciences
Robustness (computer science)
Diagnostic Medicine
medicine
Journal Article
Humans
Skeleton
Aged
business.industry
Biochemistry
Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
lcsh:R
Skull
Biology and Life Sciences
Reproducibility of Results
Magnetic resonance imaging
Mean age
Cognitive Science
lcsh:Q
business
Nuclear medicine
030217 neurology & neurosurgery
Mathematics
Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
Neuroscience
Zdroj: PLoS ONE
PLoS ONE [E], 11(10). Public Library of Science
PLoS ONE, Vol 11, Iss 10, p e0165719 (2016)
ISSN: 1932-6203
Popis: INTRODUCTION: Pooling of multicenter brain imaging data is a trend in studies on ageing related brain diseases. This poses challenges to MR-based brain segmentation. The performance across different field strengths of three widely used automated methods for brain volume measurements was assessed in the present study. METHODS: Ten subjects (mean age: 64 years) were scanned on 1.5T and 3T MRI on the same day. We determined robustness across field strength (i.e., whether measured volumes between 3T and 1.5T scans in the same subjects were similar) for SPM12, Freesurfer 5.3.0 and FSL 5.0.7. As a frame of reference, 3T MRI scans from 20 additional subjects (mean age: 71 years) were segmented manually to determine accuracy of the methods (i.e., whether measured volumes corresponded with expert-defined volumes). RESULTS: Total brain volume (TBV) measurements were robust across field strength for Freesurfer and FSL (mean absolute difference as % of mean volume ≤ 1%), but less so for SPM (4%). Gray matter (GM) and white matter (WM) volume measurements were robust for Freesurfer (1%; 2%) and FSL (2%; 3%) but less so for SPM (5%; 4%). For intracranial volume (ICV), SPM was more robust (2%) than FSL (3%) and Freesurfer (9%). TBV measurements were accurate for SPM and FSL, but less so for Freesurfer. For GM volume, SPM was accurate, but accuracy was lower for Freesurfer and FSL. For WM volume, Freesurfer was accurate, but SPM and FSL were less accurate. For ICV, FSL was accurate, while SPM and Freesurfer were less accurate. CONCLUSION: Brain volumes and ICV could be measured quite robustly in scans acquired at different field strengths, but performance of the methods varied depending on the assessed compartment (e.g., TBV or ICV). Selection of an appropriate method in multicenter brain imaging studies therefore depends on the compartment of interest.
Databáze: OpenAIRE
Externí odkaz: