INTRODUCTION: White matter hyperintensities (WMHs) are regions of abnormally high intensity on T2-weighted or fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Accurate and reproducible automatic segmentation of WMHs is important since WMHs are often seen in the elderly and are associated with various geriatric and psychiatric disorders. METHODS: We developed a fully automated monospectral segmentation method for WMHs using FLAIR MRIs. Through this method, we introduce an optimal threshold intensity (I O ) for segmenting WMHs, which varies with WMHs volume (V WMH), and we establish the I O -V WMH relationship. RESULTS: Our method showed accurate validations in volumetric and spatial agreements of automatically segmented WMHs compared with manually segmented WMHs for 32 confirmatory images. Bland-Altman values of volumetric agreement were 0.96 ± 8.311 ml (bias and 95 % confidence interval), and the similarity index of spatial agreement was 0.762 ± 0.127 (mean ± standard deviation). Furthermore, similar validation accuracies were obtained in the images acquired from different scanners. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed segmentation method uses only FLAIR MRIs, has the potential to be accurate with images obtained from different scanners, and can be implemented with a fully automated procedure. In our study, validation results were obtained with FLAIR MRIs from only two scanner types. The design of the method may allow its use in large multicenter studies with correct efficiency.
INTRODUCTION: White matter hyperintensities (WMHs) are regions of abnormally high intensity on T2-weighted or fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Accurate and reproducible automatic segmentation of WMHs is important since WMHs are often seen in the elderly and are associated with various geriatric and psychiatric disorders. METHODS: We developed a fully automated monospectral segmentation method for WMHs using FLAIR MRIs. Through this method, we introduce an optimal threshold intensity (I O ) for segmenting WMHs, which varies with WMHs volume (V WMH), and we establish the I O -V WMH relationship. RESULTS: Our method showed accurate validations in volumetric and spatial agreements of automatically segmented WMHs compared with manually segmented WMHs for 32 confirmatory images. Bland-Altman values of volumetric agreement were 0.96 ± 8.311 ml (bias and 95 % confidence interval), and the similarity index of spatial agreement was 0.762 ± 0.127 (mean ± standard deviation). Furthermore, similar validation accuracies were obtained in the images acquired from different scanners. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed segmentation method uses only FLAIR MRIs, has the potential to be accurate with images obtained from different scanners, and can be implemented with a fully automated procedure. In our study, validation results were obtained with FLAIR MRIs from only two scanner types. The design of the method may allow its use in large multicenter studies with correct efficiency.
Authors: F B Mohamed; S Vinitski; C F Gonzalez; S H Faro; F A Lublin; R Knobler; J E Gutierrez Journal: Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2001-02 Impact factor: 2.546
Authors: Ramona O Hopkins; Callie J Beck; David L Burnett; Lindell K Weaver; Jeff Victoroff; Erin D Bigler Journal: J Neuroimaging Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 2.486
Authors: F E de Leeuw; J C de Groot; E Achten; M Oudkerk; L M Ramos; R Heijboer; A Hofman; J Jolles; J van Gijn; M M Breteler Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 2001-01 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: Cheng-Chen Chang; Shun-Chieh Yu; Douglas R McQuoid; Denise F Messer; Warren D Taylor; Kulpreet Singh; Brian D Boyd; K Ranga R Krishnan; James R MacFall; David C Steffens; Martha E Payne Journal: Psychiatry Res Date: 2011-05-18 Impact factor: 3.222
Authors: C DeCarli; D G Murphy; M Tranh; C L Grady; J V Haxby; J A Gillette; J A Salerno; A Gonzales-Aviles; B Horwitz; S I Rapoport Journal: Neurology Date: 1995-11 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Renske de Boer; Henri A Vrooman; Fedde van der Lijn; Meike W Vernooij; M Arfan Ikram; Aad van der Lugt; Monique M B Breteler; Wiro J Niessen Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2009-05-01 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: C R Jack; P C O'Brien; D W Rettman; M M Shiung; Y Xu; R Muthupillai; A Manduca; R Avula; B J Erickson Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2001-12 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Maria Eugenia Caligiuri; Paolo Perrotta; Antonio Augimeri; Federico Rocca; Aldo Quattrone; Andrea Cherubini Journal: Neuroinformatics Date: 2015-07
Authors: Jun Sung Kim; Subin Lee; Seung Wan Suh; Jong Bin Bae; Ji Hyun Han; Seonjeong Byun; Ji Won Han; Jae Hyoung Kim; Ki Woong Kim Journal: J Stroke Date: 2020-01-31 Impact factor: 6.967
Authors: T Ding; A D Cohen; E E O'Connor; H T Karim; A Crainiceanu; J Muschelli; O Lopez; W E Klunk; H J Aizenstein; R Krafty; C M Crainiceanu; D L Tudorascu Journal: Neuroimage Clin Date: 2019-12-27 Impact factor: 4.881
Authors: Cassidy M Fiford; Carole H Sudre; Hugh Pemberton; Phoebe Walsh; Emily Manning; Ian B Malone; Jennifer Nicholas; Willem H Bouvy; Owen T Carmichael; Geert Jan Biessels; M Jorge Cardoso; Josephine Barnes Journal: Neuroinformatics Date: 2020-06
Authors: Jeongbin Park; Ji Won Han; Ju Ri Lee; Seonjeong Byun; Seung Wan Suh; Jae Hyoung Kim; Ki Woong Kim Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-01-16 Impact factor: 4.379