Dataset Information

Comparing Automated Subcortical Volume Estimation Methods; Amygdala Volumes Estimated by FSL and FreeSurfer Have Poor Consistency.

ABSTRACT: Subcortical volumes are a promising source of biomarkers and features in biosignatures, and automated methods facilitate extracting them in large, phenotypically rich datasets. However, while extensive research has verified that the automated methods produce volumes that are similar to those generated by expert annotation, the consistency of methods with each other is understudied. Using data from the UK Biobank, we compare the estimates of subcortical volumes produced by two popular software suites: FSL and FreeSurfer. Although most subcortical volumes exhibit good to excellent consistency across the methods, the tools produce diverging estimates of amygdalar volume. Through simulation, we show that this poor consistency can lead to conflicting results, where one but not the other tool suggests statistical significance, or where both tools suggest a significant relationship but in opposite directions. Considering these issues, we discuss several ways in which care should be taken when reporting on relationships involving amygdalar volume.

SUBMITTER: Sadil P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC11244866 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparing Automated Subcortical Volume Estimation Methods; Amygdala Volumes Estimated by FSL and FreeSurfer Have Poor Consistency.

Sadil Patrick P Lindquist Martin A MA

bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology 20240701

Subcortical volumes are a promising source of biomarkers and features in biosignatures, and automated methods facilitate extracting them in large, phenotypically rich datasets. However, while extensive research has verified that the automated methods produce volumes that are similar to those generated by expert annotation, the consistency of methods with each other is understudied. Using data from the UK Biobank, we compare the estimates of subcortical volumes produced by two popular software su ...[more]

PMID: 39005462

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeMost techniques used for automatic segmentation of subcortical brain regions are developed for three-dimensional (3D) MR images. MRIs obtained in non-specialist hospitals may be non-isotropic and two-dimensional (2D). Automatic segmentation of 2D images may be challenging and represents a lost opportunity to perform quantitative image analysis. We determine the performance of a modified subcortical segmentation technique applied to 2D images in patients with idiopathic generalised epilepsy (IGE).MethodsVolume estimates were derived from 2D (0.4 × 0.4 × 3 mm) and 3D (1 × 1x1mm) T1-weighted acquisitions in 31 patients with IGE and 39 healthy controls. 2D image segmentation was performed using a modified FSL FIRST (FMRIB Integrated Registration and Segmentation Tool) pipeline requiring additional image reorientation, cropping, interpolation and brain extraction prior to conventional FIRST segmentation. Consistency between segmentations was assessed using Dice coefficients and volumes across both approaches were compared between patients and controls. The influence of slice thickness on consistency was further assessed using 2D images with slice thickness increased to 6 mm.ResultsAll average Dice coefficients showed excellent agreement between 2 and 3D images across subcortical structures (0.86-0.96). Most 2D volumes were consistently slightly lower compared to 3D volumes. 2D images with increased slice thickness showed lower agreement with 3D images with lower Dice coefficients (0.55-0.83). Significant volume reduction of the left and right thalamus and putamen was observed in patients relative to controls across 2D and 3D images.ConclusionAutomated subcortical volume estimation of 2D images with a resolution of 0.4 × 0.4x3mm using a modified FIRST pipeline is consistent with volumes derived from 3D images, although this consistency decreases with an increased slice thickness. Thalamic and putamen atrophy has previously been reported in patients with IGE. Automated subcortical volume estimation from 2D images is feasible and most reliable at using in-plane acquisitions greater than 1 mm x 1 mm and provides an opportunity to perform quantitative image analysis studies in clinical trials.

Project description:ObjectivesTo compare the cross-sectional robustness of commonly used volumetric software and effects of lesion filling in multiple sclerosis (MS).MethodsNine MS patients (six females; age 38±13 years, disease duration 7.3±5.2 years) were scanned twice with repositioning on three MRI scanners (Siemens Aera 1.5T, Avanto 1.5T, Trio 3.0T) the same day. Volumetric T1-weighted images were processed with FreeSurfer, FSL-SIENAX, SPM and SPM-CAT before and after 3D FLAIR lesion filling with LST. The whole-brain, grey matter (GM) and white matter (WM) volumes were calculated with and without normalisation to the intracranial volume or FSL-SIENAX scaling factor. Robustness was assessed using the coefficient of variation (CoV).ResultsVariability in volumetrics was lower within than between scanners (CoV 0.17-0.96% vs. 0.65-5.0%, p<0.001). All software provided similarly robust segmentations of the brain volume on the same scanner (CoV 0.17-0.28%, p=0.076). Normalisation improved inter-scanner reproducibility in FreeSurfer and SPM-based methods, but the FSL-SIENAX scaling factor did not improve robustness. Generally, SPM-based methods produced the most consistent volumetrics, while FreeSurfer was more robust for WM volumes on different scanners. FreeSurfer had more robust normalised brain and GM volumes on different scanners than FSL-SIENAX (p=0.004). MS lesion filling changed the output of FSL-SIENAX, SPM and SPM-CAT but not FreeSurfer.ConclusionsConsistent use of the same scanner is essential and normalisation to the intracranial volume is recommended for multiple scanners. Based on robustness, SPM-based methods are particularly suitable for cross-sectional volumetry. FreeSurfer poses a suitable alternative with WM segmentations less sensitive to MS lesions.Key points• The same scanner should be used for brain volumetry. If different scanners are used, the intracranial volume normalisation improves the FreeSurfer and SPM robustness (but not the FSL scaling factor). • FreeSurfer, FSL and SPM all provide robust measures of the whole brain volume on the same MRI scanner. SPM-based methods overall provide the most robust segmentations (except white matter segmentations on different scanners where FreeSurfer is more robust). • MS lesion filling with Lesion Segmentation Toolbox changes the output of FSL-SIENAX and SPM. FreeSurfer output is not affected by MS lesion filling since it already takes white matter hypointensities into account and is therefore particularly suitable for MS brain volumetry.

Dataset Information

Comparing Automated Subcortical Volume Estimation Methods; Amygdala Volumes Estimated by FSL and FreeSurfer Have Poor Consistency.

Publications

Comparing Automated Subcortical Volume Estimation Methods; Amygdala Volumes Estimated by FSL and FreeSurfer Have Poor Consistency.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets