A robust method to estimate the intracranial volume across MRI field strengths (1.5T and 3T)

By Shiva Keihaninejad, Rolf A. Heckemann, Gianlorenzo Fagiolo, Mark R. Symms, Joseph V. Hajnal, Alexander Hammers. NeuroImage, 2010

1,815 citations recorded by the source corpus.

As population-based studies may obtain images from scanners with different field strengths, a method to normalize regional brain volumes according to intracranial volume (ICV) independent of field strength is needed. We found systematic differences in ICV estimation, tested in a cohort of healthy subjects (n = 5) that had been imaged using 1.5T and 3T scanners, and confirmed in two independent cohorts. This was related to systematic differences in the intensity of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), with higher intensities for CSF located in the ventricles compared with CSF in the cisterns, at 3T versus 1.5T, which could not be removed with three different applied bias correction algorithms. We developed a method based on tissue probability maps in MNI (Montreal Neurological Institute) space and reverse normalization (reverse brain mask, RBM) and validated it against manual ICV measurements. We also compared it with alternative automated ICV estimation methods based on Statistical Parametric Mapping (SPM5) and Brain Extraction Tool (FSL). The proposed RBM method was equivalent to manual ICV normalization with a high intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC = 0.99) and reliable across different field strengths. RBM achieved the best combination of precision and reliability in a group of healthy subjects, a group of patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and can be used as a common normalization framework.

Subfields: Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/07183f004f76e27ee6beb204d350a40796d96bf8

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

In Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging

Citations in the corpus

Image processing and analysis methods for the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study (2018, methodology): “Overview The ABCD DAIC performs centralized processing and analysis of MRI data from each modality, leveraging validated methods used in other large-scale studies, including the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) (Mueller et al., 2005), Vietnam Era Twin Study of Aging (VETSA) (Kremen”
Automated Volumetry and Regional Thickness Analysis of Hippocampal Subfields and Medial Temporal Cortical Structures in Mild Cognitive Impairment (2014, methodology): “However, nearly all published applications of this technique have been to T1-weighted MRI with “routine” resolution on the order of 1 3 1 3 1 mm3 [e.g., Engvig et al., 2012; Hanseeuw et al., 2011; Iglesias et al., 2013; Lim et al., 2012; Pereira et al., 2013; Teicher et al., 2012].”
High-resolution magnetic resonance imaging reveals nuclei of the human amygdala: manual segmentation to automatic atlas (2017, methodology): “The tissue block was subsequently scanned in a 7 T Siemens scanner using a 3D FLASH sequence with TR = 60msec, TE = 30 msec, α = 20° (Fischl et al., 2009; Augustinack et al., 2013).”
A Primer on Pattern-Based Approaches to fMRI: Principles, Pitfalls, and Perspectives. (2015, methodology): “A different approach is to spatially filter the data, for example, using three-dimensional (3D) wavelet pyramids (e.g., Hackmack et al., 2012; Figure 3D).”
BEaST: Brain extraction based on nonlocal segmentation technique (2012, background): “As shown in (Keihaninejad et al., 2010), the scanner field strength has significant impact on intra-cranial cavity segmentations.”
Microglia in Alzheimer’s disease (2018, background): “For example, a common variant in SPI1 is associated with reduced AD risk and reduced SPI1 expression (Huang et al., 2017); SPI1 encodes the PU.”