Literature DB >> 19195496

Evaluation of 14 nonlinear deformation algorithms applied to human brain MRI registration.

Arno Klein1, Jesper Andersson, Babak A Ardekani, John Ashburner, Brian Avants, Ming-Chang Chiang, Gary E Christensen, D Louis Collins, James Gee, Pierre Hellier, Joo Hyun Song, Mark Jenkinson, Claude Lepage, Daniel Rueckert, Paul Thompson, Tom Vercauteren, Roger P Woods, J John Mann, Ramin V Parsey.   

Abstract

All fields of neuroscience that employ brain imaging need to communicate their results with reference to anatomical regions. In particular, comparative morphometry and group analysis of functional and physiological data require coregistration of brains to establish correspondences across brain structures. It is well established that linear registration of one brain to another is inadequate for aligning brain structures, so numerous algorithms have emerged to nonlinearly register brains to one another. This study is the largest evaluation of nonlinear deformation algorithms applied to brain image registration ever conducted. Fourteen algorithms from laboratories around the world are evaluated using 8 different error measures. More than 45,000 registrations between 80 manually labeled brains were performed by algorithms including: AIR, ANIMAL, ART, Diffeomorphic Demons, FNIRT, IRTK, JRD-fluid, ROMEO, SICLE, SyN, and four different SPM5 algorithms ("SPM2-type" and regular Normalization, Unified Segmentation, and the DARTEL Toolbox). All of these registrations were preceded by linear registration between the same image pairs using FLIRT. One of the most significant findings of this study is that the relative performances of the registration methods under comparison appear to be little affected by the choice of subject population, labeling protocol, and type of overlap measure. This is important because it suggests that the findings are generalizable to new subject populations that are labeled or evaluated using different labeling protocols. Furthermore, we ranked the 14 methods according to three completely independent analyses (permutation tests, one-way ANOVA tests, and indifference-zone ranking) and derived three almost identical top rankings of the methods. ART, SyN, IRTK, and SPM's DARTEL Toolbox gave the best results according to overlap and distance measures, with ART and SyN delivering the most consistently high accuracy across subjects and label sets. Updates will be published on the http://www.mindboggle.info/papers/ website.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19195496      PMCID: PMC2747506          DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.12.037

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuroimage        ISSN: 1053-8119            Impact factor:   6.556


  48 in total

1.  Nonlinear spatial normalization using basis functions.

Authors:  J Ashburner; K J Friston
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 5.038

2.  Consistent landmark and intensity-based image registration.

Authors:  H J Johnson; G E Christensen
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 10.048

3.  HAMMER: hierarchical attribute matching mechanism for elastic registration.

Authors:  Dinggang Shen; Christos Davatzikos
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 10.048

4.  Performance-based classifier combination in atlas-based image segmentation using expectation-maximization parameter estimation.

Authors:  Torsten Rohlfing; Daniel B Russakoff; Calvin R Maurer
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 10.048

5.  Cortical surface-based analysis. I. Segmentation and surface reconstruction.

Authors:  A M Dale; B Fischl; M I Sereno
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 6.556

6.  Automated image registration: I. General methods and intrasubject, intramodality validation.

Authors:  R P Woods; S T Grafton; C J Holmes; S R Cherry; J C Mazziotta
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  1998 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.826

7.  Lesion segmentation and manual warping to a reference brain: intra- and interobserver reliability.

Authors:  J A Fiez; H Damasio; T J Grabowski
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 5.038

8.  A fully automatic multimodality image registration algorithm.

Authors:  B A Ardekani; M Braun; B F Hutton; I Kanno; H Iida
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  1995 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.826

9.  Automatic 3D intersubject registration of MR volumetric data in standardized Talairach space.

Authors:  D L Collins; P Neelin; T M Peters; A C Evans
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  1994 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.826

10.  Mindboggle: automated brain labeling with multiple atlases.

Authors:  Arno Klein; Brett Mensh; Satrajit Ghosh; Jason Tourville; Joy Hirsch
Journal:  BMC Med Imaging       Date:  2005-10-05       Impact factor: 1.930

View more
  836 in total

1.  Comparison of brain volume abnormalities between ADHD and conduct disorder in adolescence.

Authors:  Michael C Stevens; Emily Haney-Caron
Journal:  J Psychiatry Neurosci       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 6.186

Review 2.  MRI monitoring of immunomodulation in relapse-onset multiple sclerosis trials.

Authors:  Frederik Barkhof; Jack H Simon; Franz Fazekas; Marco Rovaris; Ludwig Kappos; Nicola de Stefano; Chris H Polman; John Petkau; Ernst W Radue; Maria P Sormani; David K Li; Paul O'Connor; Xavier Montalban; David H Miller; Massimo Filippi
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurol       Date:  2011-12-06       Impact factor: 42.937

3.  Functionally distinct regions for spatial processing and sensory motor integration in the planum temporale.

Authors:  A Lisette Isenberg; Kenneth I Vaden; Kourosh Saberi; L Tugan Muftuler; Gregory Hickok
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2011-09-20       Impact factor: 5.038

4.  Some is not enough: quantifier comprehension in corticobasal syndrome and behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia.

Authors:  Brianna Morgan; Rachel G Gross; Robin Clark; Michael Dreyfuss; Ashley Boller; Emily Camp; Tsao-Wei Liang; Brian Avants; Corey T McMillan; Murray Grossman
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2011-09-12       Impact factor: 3.139

5.  Age-related metabolic profiles in cognitively healthy elders: results from a voxel-based [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose-positron-emission tomography study with partial volume effects correction.

Authors:  P K Curiati; J H Tamashiro-Duran; F L S Duran; C A Buchpiguel; P Squarzoni; D C Romano; H Vallada; P R Menezes; M Scazufca; G F Busatto; T C T F Alves
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2011-01-27       Impact factor: 3.825

6.  Brain volumes differ between diagnostic groups of violent criminal offenders.

Authors:  Katja Bertsch; Michel Grothe; Kristin Prehn; Knut Vohs; Christoph Berger; Karlheinz Hauenstein; Peter Keiper; Gregor Domes; Stefan Teipel; Sabine C Herpertz
Journal:  Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci       Date:  2013-02-05       Impact factor: 5.270

7.  Ex vivo T2 relaxation: associations with age-related neuropathology and cognition.

Authors:  Robert J Dawe; David A Bennett; Julie A Schneider; Sue E Leurgans; Aikaterini Kotrotsou; Patricia A Boyle; Konstantinos Arfanakis
Journal:  Neurobiol Aging       Date:  2014-02-06       Impact factor: 4.673

8.  Heightened extended amygdala metabolism following threat characterizes the early phenotypic risk to develop anxiety-related psychopathology.

Authors:  A J Shackman; A S Fox; J A Oler; S E Shelton; T R Oakes; R J Davidson; N H Kalin
Journal:  Mol Psychiatry       Date:  2016-08-30       Impact factor: 15.992

9.  Adaptive template generation for amyloid PET using a deep learning approach.

Authors:  Seung Kwan Kang; Seongho Seo; Seong A Shin; Min Soo Byun; Dong Young Lee; Yu Kyeong Kim; Dong Soo Lee; Jae Sung Lee
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2018-05-11       Impact factor: 5.038

10.  Corpus callosum shape changes in early Alzheimer's disease: an MRI study using the OASIS brain database.

Authors:  Babak A Ardekani; Alvin H Bachman; Khadija Figarsky; John J Sidtis
Journal:  Brain Struct Funct       Date:  2013-01-16       Impact factor: 3.270

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.