• NeuroImage · Nov 2014

    Multi-atlas segmentation of the whole hippocampus and subfields using multiple automatically generated templates.

    • Jon Pipitone, Min Tae M Park, Julie Winterburn, Tristram A Lett, Jason P Lerch, Jens C Pruessner, Martin Lepage, Aristotle N Voineskos, M Mallar Chakravarty, and Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative.
    • Kimel Family Translational Imaging-Genetics Lab, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, ON, Canada. Electronic address: jon.pipitone@utoronto.ca.
    • Neuroimage. 2014 Nov 1;101:494-512.

    IntroductionAdvances in image segmentation of magnetic resonance images (MRI) have demonstrated that multi-atlas approaches improve segmentation over regular atlas-based approaches. These approaches often rely on a large number of manually segmented atlases (e.g. 30-80) that take significant time and expertise to produce. We present an algorithm, MAGeT-Brain (Multiple Automatically Generated Templates), for the automatic segmentation of the hippocampus that minimises the number of atlases needed whilst still achieving similar agreement to multi-atlas approaches. Thus, our method acts as a reliable multi-atlas approach when using special or hard-to-define atlases that are laborious to construct.MethodMAGeT-Brain works by propagating atlas segmentations to a template library, formed from a subset of target images, via transformations estimated by nonlinear image registration. The resulting segmentations are then propagated to each target image and fused using a label fusion method. We conduct two separate Monte Carlo cross-validation experiments comparing MAGeT-Brain and basic multi-atlas whole hippocampal segmentation using differing atlas and template library sizes, and registration and label fusion methods. The first experiment is a 10-fold validation (per parameter setting) over 60 subjects taken from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Database (ADNI), and the second is a five-fold validation over 81 subjects having had a first episode of psychosis. In both cases, automated segmentations are compared with manual segmentations following the Pruessner-protocol. Using the best settings found from these experiments, we segment 246 images of the ADNI1:Complete 1Yr 1.5 T dataset and compare these with segmentations from existing automated and semi-automated methods: FSL FIRST, FreeSurfer, MAPER, and SNT. Finally, we conduct a leave-one-out cross-validation of hippocampal subfield segmentation in standard 3T T1-weighted images, using five high-resolution manually segmented atlases (Winterburn et al., 2013).ResultsIn the ADNI cross-validation, using 9 atlases MAGeT-Brain achieves a mean Dice's Similarity Coefficient (DSC) score of 0.869 with respect to manual whole hippocampus segmentations, and also exhibits significantly lower variability in DSC scores than multi-atlas segmentation. In the younger, psychosis dataset, MAGeT-Brain achieves a mean DSC score of 0.892 and produces volumes which agree with manual segmentation volumes better than those produced by the FreeSurfer and FSL FIRST methods (mean difference in volume: 80 mm(3), 1600 mm(3), and 800 mm(3), respectively). Similarly, in the ADNI1:Complete 1Yr 1.5 T dataset, MAGeT-Brain produces hippocampal segmentations well correlated (r>0.85) with SNT semi-automated reference volumes within disease categories, and shows a conservative bias and a mean difference in volume of 250 mm(3) across the entire dataset, compared with FreeSurfer and FSL FIRST which both overestimate volume differences by 2600 mm(3) and 2800 mm(3) on average, respectively. Finally, MAGeT-Brain segments the CA1, CA4/DG and subiculum subfields on standard 3T T1-weighted resolution images with DSC overlap scores of 0.56, 0.65, and 0.58, respectively, relative to manual segmentations.ConclusionWe demonstrate that MAGeT-Brain produces consistent whole hippocampal segmentations using only 9 atlases, or fewer, with various hippocampal definitions, disease populations, and image acquisition types. Additionally, we show that MAGeT-Brain identifies hippocampal subfields in standard 3T T1-weighted images with overlap scores comparable to competing methods.Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.