| Literature DB >> 23861724 |
Ching-Fen Jiang1, Chiung-Chih Chang, Shu-Hua Huang, Chia-Hsiang Wu.
Abstract
Quantification of regional (99m)Tc-TRODAT-1 binding ratio in the striatum regions in SPECT images is essential for differential diagnosis between Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases. Defining the region of the striatum in the SPECT image is the first step toward success in the quantification of the TRODAT-1 binding ratio. However, because SPECT images reveal insufficient information regarding the anatomical structure of the brain, correct delineation of the striatum directly from the SPECT image is almost impossible. We present a method integrating the active contour model and the hybrid registration technique to extract regions from MR T1-weighted images and map them into the corresponding SPECT images. Results from three normal subjects suggest that the segmentation accuracy using the proposed method was compatible with the expert decision but has a higher efficiency and reproducibility than manual delineation. The binding ratio derived by this method correlated well (R (2) = 0.76) with those values calculated by commercial software, suggesting the feasibility of the proposed method.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23861724 PMCID: PMC3703728 DOI: 10.1155/2013/593175
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Math Methods Med ISSN: 1748-670X Impact factor: 2.238
Figure 1The overall process to derive the BRs in SPECT images via registration of the images from SPECT-CT and MR with ROI segmentation from the registered MR images.
Figure 2Anatomical structure of the striatum from the axial view of an MR T1-weighted image.
Figure 3An example of registration of the CT image (middle small panel) and the MR image (right small panel) to render the final fused image (left large panel). The red and blue lines in the small panels are the detected boundaries and the contour of the head.
Figure 4Registration between (a) SPECT and (b) MR to give the final overlaid image in (c).
Figure 5The ST regions in (a) the original MR T1-weighted image and the corresponding segmentation results by (b) manual delineation and (c) the GVF snake.
Correspondence of the manual delineation between the observers.
| JI (%) | Rater A-Rater B | Rater B-Rater C | Rater A-Rater C |
|---|---|---|---|
| Case 1 | 60.4 ± 4.8 | 62.1 ± 1.1 | 75.6 ± 2.1 |
| Case 2 | 54.3 ± 4.5 | 54.7 ± 5.6 | 71.8 ± 5.2 |
| Case 3 | 58.0 ± 4.7 | 58.1 ± 5.4 | 76.6 ± 5.2 |
Correspondence between manual delineation and the GVF snake result for each observer.
| JI (%) | Rater A-GVF | Rater B-GVF | Rater C-GVF |
|---|---|---|---|
| Case 1 | 64.4 ± 9.0 | 56.2 ± 5.5 | 65.3 ± 4.8 |
| Case 2 | 68.6 ± 1.6 | 57.7 ± 5.1 | 65.4 ± 6.5 |
| Case 3 | 61.1 ± 3.8 | 51.5 ± 3.1 | 59.9 ± 3.7 |
Correspondence between two repeated conductions of each method.
| Slice no. | JI (%) | |
|---|---|---|
| Manual drawing | GVF deformation | |
| 1 | 66.3 | 77.05 |
| 2 | 61.2 | 73.31 |
| 3 | 53.34 | 78.3 |
| 4 | 51.3 | 71.46 |
| 5 | 45.57 | 78.44 |
| Mean ± std | 55.5 ± 8.2 | 75.7 ± 3.2 |
std: standard deviation.
Figure 6Linear regression analysis between the BRs derived by our method and those by the commercial software.