Literature DB >> 24532539

Comparing manual and automatic segmentation of hippocampal volumes: reliability and validity issues in younger and older brains.

Elisabeth Wenger1, Johan Mårtensson, Hannes Noack, Nils Christian Bodammer, Simone Kühn, Sabine Schaefer, Hans-Jochen Heinze, Emrah Düzel, Lars Bäckman, Ulman Lindenberger, Martin Lövdén.   

Abstract

We compared hippocampal volume measures obtained by manual tracing to automatic segmentation with FreeSurfer in 44 younger (20-30 years) and 47 older (60-70 years) adults, each measured with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) over three successive time points, separated by four months. Retest correlations over time were very high for both manual and FreeSurfer segmentations. With FreeSurfer, correlations over time were significantly lower in the older than in the younger age group, which was not the case with manual segmentation. Pearson correlations between manual and FreeSurfer estimates were sufficiently high, numerically even higher in the younger group, whereas intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) estimates were lower in the younger than in the older group. FreeSurfer yielded higher volume estimates than manual segmentation, particularly in the younger age group. Importantly, FreeSurfer consistently overestimated hippocampal volumes independently of manually assessed volume in the younger age group, but overestimated larger volumes in the older age group to a less extent, introducing a systematic age bias in the data. Age differences in hippocampal volumes were significant with FreeSurfer, but not with manual tracing. Manual tracing resulted in a significant difference between left and right hippocampus (right > left), whereas this asymmetry effect was considerably smaller with FreeSurfer estimates. We conclude that FreeSurfer constitutes a feasible method to assess differences in hippocampal volume in young adults. FreeSurfer estimates in older age groups should, however, be interpreted with care until the automatic segmentation pipeline has been further optimized to increase validity and reliability in this age group.
Copyright © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  FreeSurfer; aging; hippocampus; left right asymmetry; manual segmentation

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24532539      PMCID: PMC6869097          DOI: 10.1002/hbm.22473

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp        ISSN: 1065-9471            Impact factor:   5.038


  65 in total

1.  Volumetry of hippocampus and amygdala with high-resolution MRI and three-dimensional analysis software: minimizing the discrepancies between laboratories.

Authors:  J C Pruessner; L M Li; W Serles; M Pruessner; D L Collins; N Kabani; S Lupien; A C Evans
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 5.357

2.  "Voxel-based morphometry" should not be used with imperfectly registered images.

Authors:  F L Bookstein
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 6.556

3.  Comparison of manual and automated determination of hippocampal volumes in MCI and early AD.

Authors:  Li Shen; Andrew J Saykin; Sungeun Kim; Hiram A Firpi; John D West; Shannon L Risacher; Brenna C McDonald; Tara L McHugh; Heather A Wishart; Laura A Flashman
Journal:  Brain Imaging Behav       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 3.978

4.  Training-induced brain structure changes in the elderly.

Authors:  Janina Boyke; Joenna Driemeyer; Christian Gaser; Christian Büchel; Arne May
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2008-07-09       Impact factor: 6.167

5.  Hippocampal volume measurements using magnetic resonance imaging in normal young adults.

Authors:  N A Honeycutt; C D Smith
Journal:  J Neuroimaging       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 2.486

6.  Preservation of hippocampal volume throughout adulthood in healthy men and women.

Authors:  Edith V Sullivan; Laura Marsh; Adolf Pfefferbaum
Journal:  Neurobiol Aging       Date:  2004-12-08       Impact factor: 4.673

7.  In vivo hippocampal measurement and memory: a comparison of manual tracing and automated segmentation in a large community-based sample.

Authors:  Nicolas Cherbuin; Kaarin J Anstey; Chantal Réglade-Meslin; Perminder S Sachdev
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-04-16       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 8.  Psychobiology of plasticity: effects of training and experience on brain and behavior.

Authors:  M R Rosenzweig; E L Bennett
Journal:  Behav Brain Res       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 3.332

9.  A comparison of automated segmentation and manual tracing for quantifying hippocampal and amygdala volumes.

Authors:  Rajendra A Morey; Christopher M Petty; Yuan Xu; Jasmeet Pannu Hayes; H Ryan Wagner; Darrell V Lewis; Kevin S LaBar; Martin Styner; Gregory McCarthy
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2008-12-30       Impact factor: 6.556

10.  Hippocampal volume and asymmetry in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease: Meta-analyses of MRI studies.

Authors:  Feng Shi; Bing Liu; Yuan Zhou; Chunshui Yu; Tianzi Jiang
Journal:  Hippocampus       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 3.899

View more
  64 in total

1.  Photoperiod is associated with hippocampal volume in a large community sample.

Authors:  Megan A Miller; Regina L Leckie; Shannon D Donofry; Peter J Gianaros; Kirk I Erickson; Stephen B Manuck; Kathryn A Roecklein
Journal:  Hippocampus       Date:  2015-01-20       Impact factor: 3.899

Review 2.  Structural Image Analysis of the Brain in Neuropsychology Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Techniques.

Authors:  Erin D Bigler
Journal:  Neuropsychol Rev       Date:  2015-08-18       Impact factor: 7.444

3.  Comparative performance evaluation of automated segmentation methods of hippocampus from magnetic resonance images of temporal lobe epilepsy patients.

Authors:  Mohammad-Parsa Hosseini; Mohammad-Reza Nazem-Zadeh; Dario Pompili; Kourosh Jafari-Khouzani; Kost Elisevich; Hamid Soltanian-Zadeh
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Assessing hippocampal development and language in early childhood: Evidence from a new application of the Automatic Segmentation Adapter Tool.

Authors:  Joshua K Lee; Christine W Nordahl; David G Amaral; Aaron Lee; Marjorie Solomon; Simona Ghetti
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2015-08-17       Impact factor: 5.038

5.  Associations between brain morphology and motor performance in chronic neck pain: A whole-brain surface-based morphometry approach.

Authors:  Robby De Pauw; Iris Coppieters; Karen Caeyenberghs; Jeroen Kregel; Hannelore Aerts; Dorine Lenoir; Barbara Cagnie
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2019-06-20       Impact factor: 5.038

6.  Multi-center reproducibility of structural, diffusion tensor, and resting state functional magnetic resonance imaging measures.

Authors:  S Deprez; Michiel B de Ruiter; S Bogaert; R Peeters; J Belderbos; D De Ruysscher; S Schagen; S Sunaert; P Pullens; E Achten
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  2018-04-14       Impact factor: 2.804

Review 7.  Automated methods for hippocampus segmentation: the evolution and a review of the state of the art.

Authors:  Vanderson Dill; Alexandre Rosa Franco; Márcio Sarroglia Pinho
Journal:  Neuroinformatics       Date:  2015-04

Review 8.  [Neurobiology of schizophrenia: new findings from the structure to the molecules].

Authors:  A Schmitt; B Malchow; D Keeser; P Falkai; A Hasan
Journal:  Nervenarzt       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 1.214

9.  Cortical Thickness and Subcortical Gray Matter Volume in Pediatric Anxiety Disorders.

Authors:  Andrea L Gold; Elizabeth R Steuber; Lauren K White; Jennifer Pacheco; Jessica F Sachs; David Pagliaccio; Erin Berman; Ellen Leibenluft; Daniel S Pine
Journal:  Neuropsychopharmacology       Date:  2017-04-24       Impact factor: 7.853

10.  The Lifespan Trajectory of the Encoding-Retrieval Flip: A Multimodal Examination of Medial Parietal Cortex Contributions to Episodic Memory.

Authors:  Inge K Amlien; Markus H Sneve; Didac Vidal-Piñeiro; Kristine B Walhovd; Anders M Fjell
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2018-08-24       Impact factor: 6.167

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.