Dataset Information

Automatic brain lesion segmentation on standard magnetic resonance images: a scoping review.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

Medical image analysis practices face challenges that can potentially be addressed with algorithm-based segmentation tools. In this study, we map the field of automatic MR brain lesion segmentation to understand the clinical applicability of prevalent methods and study designs, as well as challenges and limitations in the field.

Design

Scoping review.

Setting

Three databases (PubMed, IEEE Xplore and Scopus) were searched with tailored queries. Studies were included based on predefined criteria. Emerging themes during consecutive title, abstract, methods and whole-text screening were identified. The full-text analysis focused on materials, preprocessing, performance evaluation and comparison.

Results

Out of 2990 unique articles identified through the search, 441 articles met the eligibility criteria, with an estimated growth rate of 10% per year. We present a general overview and trends in the field with regard to publication sources, segmentation principles used and types of lesions. Algorithms are predominantly evaluated by measuring the agreement of segmentation results with a trusted reference. Few articles describe measures of clinical validity.

Conclusions

The observed reporting practices leave room for improvement with a view to studying replication, method comparison and clinical applicability. To promote this improvement, we propose a list of recommendations for future studies in the field.

SUBMITTER: Gryska E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7849889 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundImage segmentation is an essential step in the analysis and subsequent characterisation of brain tumours through magnetic resonance imaging. In the literature, segmentation methods are empowered by open-access magnetic resonance imaging datasets, such as the brain tumour segmentation dataset. Moreover, with the increased use of artificial intelligence methods in medical imaging, access to larger data repositories has become vital in method development.PurposeTo determine what automated brain tumour segmentation techniques can medical imaging specialists and clinicians use to identify tumour components, compared to manual segmentation.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of 572 brain tumour segmentation studies during 2015-2020. We reviewed segmentation techniques using T1-weighted, T2-weighted, gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted, fluid-attenuated inversion recovery, diffusion-weighted and perfusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging sequences. Moreover, we assessed physics or mathematics-based methods, deep learning methods, and software-based or semi-automatic methods, as applied to magnetic resonance imaging techniques. Particularly, we synthesised each method as per the utilised magnetic resonance imaging sequences, study population, technical approach (such as deep learning) and performance score measures (such as Dice score).Statistical testsWe compared median Dice score in segmenting the whole tumour, tumour core and enhanced tumour.ResultsWe found that T1-weighted, gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted, T2-weighted and fluid-attenuated inversion recovery magnetic resonance imaging are used the most in various segmentation algorithms. However, there is limited use of perfusion-weighted and diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Moreover, we found that the U-Net deep learning technology is cited the most, and has high accuracy (Dice score 0.9) for magnetic resonance imaging-based brain tumour segmentation.ConclusionU-Net is a promising deep learning technology for magnetic resonance imaging-based brain tumour segmentation. The community should be encouraged to contribute open-access datasets so training, testing and validation of deep learning algorithms can be improved, particularly for diffusion- and perfusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging, where there are limited datasets available.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Accurate segmentation of MS lesions on MRI is difficult and, if performed manually, time consuming. Automatic segmentations rely strongly on the image contrast and signal-to-noise ratio. Literature examining segmentation tool performances in real-world multi-site data acquisition settings is scarce. OBJECTIVE:FLAIR2, a combination of T2-weighted and fluid attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) images, improves tissue contrast while suppressing CSF. We compared the use of FLAIR and FLAIR2 in LesionTOADS, OASIS and the lesion segmentation toolbox (LST) when applied to non-homogenized, multi-center 2D-imaging data. METHODS:Lesions were segmented on 47 MS patient data sets obtained from 34 sites using LesionTOADS, OASIS and LST, and compared to a semi-automatically generated reference. The performance of FLAIR and FLAIR2 was assessed using the relative lesion volume difference (LVD), Dice coefficient (DSC), sensitivity (SEN) and symmetric surface distance (SSD). Performance improvements related to lesion volumes (LVs) were evaluated for all tools. For comparison, LesionTOADS was also used to segment lesions from 3 T single-center MR data of 40 clinically isolated syndrome (CIS) patients. RESULTS:Compared to FLAIR, the use of FLAIR2 in LesionTOADS led to improvements of 31.6% (LVD), 14.0% (DSC), 25.1% (SEN), and 47.0% (SSD) in the multi-center study. DSC and SSD significantly improved for larger LVs, while LVD and SEN were enhanced independent of LV. OASIS showed little difference between FLAIR and FLAIR2, likely due to its inherent use of T2w and FLAIR. LST replicated the benefits of FLAIR2 only in part, indicating that further optimization, particularly at low LVs is needed. In the CIS study, LesionTOADS did not benefit from the use of FLAIR2 as the segmentation performance for both FLAIR and FLAIR2 was heterogeneous. CONCLUSIONS:In this real-world, multi-center experiment, FLAIR2 outperformed FLAIR in its ability to segment MS lesions with LesionTOADS. The computation of FLAIR2 enhanced lesion detection, at minimally increased computational time or cost, even retrospectively. Further work is needed to determine how LesionTOADS and other tools, such as LST, can optimally benefit from the improved FLAIR2 contrast.