WeChat Mini Program
Old Version Features

Performance of Three Freely Available Methods for Extracting White Matter Hyperintensities: FreeSurfer, UBO Detector, and BIANCA.

HUMAN BRAIN MAPPING(2022)

Binzmuehlestr 14

Cited 15|Views14
Abstract
White matter hyperintensities (WMH) of presumed vascular origin are frequently found in MRIs of healthy older adults. WMH are also associated with aging and cognitive decline. Here, we compared and validated three algorithms for WMH extraction: FreeSurfer (T1w), UBO Detector (T1w + FLAIR), and FSL's Brain Intensity AbNormality Classification Algorithm (BIANCA; T1w + FLAIR) using a longitudinal dataset comprising MRI data of cognitively healthy older adults (baseline N = 231, age range 64–87 years). As reference we manually segmented WMH in T1w, three‐dimensional (3D) FLAIR, and two‐dimensional (2D) FLAIR images which were used to assess the segmentation accuracy of the different automated algorithms. Further, we assessed the relationships of WMH volumes provided by the algorithms with Fazekas scores and age. FreeSurfer underestimated the WMH volumes and scored worst in Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC = 0.434) but its WMH volumes strongly correlated with the Fazekas scores (rs = 0.73). BIANCA accomplished the highest DSC (0.602) in 3D FLAIR images. However, the relations with the Fazekas scores were only moderate, especially in the 2D FLAIR images (rs = 0.41), and many outlier WMH volumes were detected when exploring within‐person trajectories (2D FLAIR: ~30%). UBO Detector performed similarly to BIANCA in DSC with both modalities and reached the best DSC in 2D FLAIR (0.531) without requiring a tailored training dataset. In addition, it achieved very high associations with the Fazekas scores (2D FLAIR: rs = 0.80). In summary, our results emphasize the importance of carefully contemplating the choice of the WMH segmentation algorithm and MR‐modality.
More
Translated text
Key words
automated segmentation,healthy aging,MRI,validation,white matter hyperintensities
PDF
Bibtex
收藏
AI Read Science
Must-Reading Tree
Example
Generate MRT to find the research sequence of this paper
Data Disclaimer
The page data are from open Internet sources, cooperative publishers and automatic analysis results through AI technology. We do not make any commitments and guarantees for the validity, accuracy, correctness, reliability, completeness and timeliness of the page data. If you have any questions, please contact us by email: report@aminer.cn
Chat Paper

要点】:本文比较和验证了三种自由获取的方法——FreeSurfer、UBO Detector和BIANCA在提取白质高信号区(WMH)的性能,发现各方法在Dice相似度系数和与Fazekas评分的相关性上有显著差异,强调了选择WMH分割算法和MR模态的重要性。

方法】:通过在T1w和FLAIR MRI图像上手动分割WMH作为参考标准,评估了三种算法的分割准确性。

实验】:在包含231名认知健康老年人的纵向数据集上进行实验,对比了三种算法的WMH体积估计值与Fazekas评分和年龄的关系,FreeSurfer在Dice相似度系数(DSC)得分最低(DSC = 0.434),但与Fazekas评分的相关性最强(r(s) = 0.73);BIANCA在3D FLAIR图像上DSC得分最高(0.602),但与Fazekas评分的相关性一般,尤其是2D FLAIR图像(r(s) = 0.41);UBO Detector在两种模态下表现与BIANCA相似,并在2D FLAIR上获得最佳DSC(0.531),且与Fazekas评分的相关性很高(2D FLAIR: r(s) = 0.80)。