Literature DB >> 25463466

An algorithm for optimal fusion of atlases with different labeling protocols.

Juan Eugenio Iglesias1, Mert Rory Sabuncu2, Iman Aganj3, Priyanka Bhatt4, Christen Casillas4, David Salat3, Adam Boxer4, Bruce Fischl5, Koen Van Leemput6.   

Abstract

In this paper we present a novel label fusion algorithm suited for scenarios in which different manual delineation protocols with potentially disparate structures have been used to annotate the training scans (hereafter referred to as "atlases"). Such scenarios arise when atlases have missing structures, when they have been labeled with different levels of detail, or when they have been taken from different heterogeneous databases. The proposed algorithm can be used to automatically label a novel scan with any of the protocols from the training data. Further, it enables us to generate new labels that are not present in any delineation protocol by defining intersections on the underling labels. We first use probabilistic models of label fusion to generalize three popular label fusion techniques to the multi-protocol setting: majority voting, semi-locally weighted voting and STAPLE. Then, we identify some shortcomings of the generalized methods, namely the inability to produce meaningful posterior probabilities for the different labels (majority voting, semi-locally weighted voting) and to exploit the similarities between the atlases (all three methods). Finally, we propose a novel generative label fusion model that can overcome these drawbacks. We use the proposed method to combine four brain MRI datasets labeled with different protocols (with a total of 102 unique labeled structures) to produce segmentations of 148 brain regions. Using cross-validation, we show that the proposed algorithm outperforms the generalizations of majority voting, semi-locally weighted voting and STAPLE (mean Dice score 83%, vs. 77%, 80% and 79%, respectively). We also evaluated the proposed algorithm in an aging study, successfully reproducing some well-known results in cortical and subcortical structures.
Copyright © 2014. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Label fusion; Segmentation

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25463466      PMCID: PMC4286284          DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.11.031

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


  38 in total

1.  Whole brain segmentation: automated labeling of neuroanatomical structures in the human brain.

Authors:  Bruce Fischl; David H Salat; Evelina Busa; Marilyn Albert; Megan Dieterich; Christian Haselgrove; Andre van der Kouwe; Ron Killiany; David Kennedy; Shuna Klaveness; Albert Montillo; Nikos Makris; Bruce Rosen; Anders M Dale
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2002-01-31       Impact factor: 17.173

2.  Automatic segmentation of brain MRIs of 2-year-olds into 83 regions of interest.

Authors:  Ioannis S Gousias; Daniel Rueckert; Rolf A Heckemann; Leigh E Dyet; James P Boardman; A David Edwards; Alexander Hammers
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2007-12-03       Impact factor: 6.556

3.  Measurement of cortical thickness from MRI by minimum line integrals on soft-classified tissue.

Authors:  Iman Aganj; Guillermo Sapiro; Neelroop Parikshak; Sarah K Madsen; Paul M Thompson
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 5.038

4.  Multi-atlas based segmentation of brain images: atlas selection and its effect on accuracy.

Authors:  P Aljabar; R A Heckemann; A Hammers; J V Hajnal; D Rueckert
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2009-02-23       Impact factor: 6.556

5.  Robust statistical fusion of image labels.

Authors:  Bennett A Landman; Andrew J Asman; Andrew G Scoggins; John A Bogovic; Fangxu Xing; Jerry L Prince
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2011-10-14       Impact factor: 10.048

6.  Simultaneous truth and performance level estimation through fusion of probabilistic segmentations.

Authors:  Alireza Akhondi-Asl; Simon K Warfield
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2013-06-04       Impact factor: 10.048

7.  Multiatlas segmentation as nonparametric regression.

Authors:  Suyash P Awate; Ross T Whitaker
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2014-04-30       Impact factor: 10.048

8.  A structural MRI study of human brain development from birth to 2 years.

Authors:  Rebecca C Knickmeyer; Sylvain Gouttard; Chaeryon Kang; Dianne Evans; Kathy Wilber; J Keith Smith; Robert M Hamer; Weili Lin; Guido Gerig; John H Gilmore
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2008-11-19       Impact factor: 6.167

9.  Automatic anatomical brain MRI segmentation combining label propagation and decision fusion.

Authors:  Rolf A Heckemann; Joseph V Hajnal; Paul Aljabar; Daniel Rueckert; Alexander Hammers
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2006-07-24       Impact factor: 6.556

10.  Strongly reduced volumes of putamen and thalamus in Alzheimer's disease: an MRI study.

Authors:  L W de Jong; K van der Hiele; I M Veer; J J Houwing; R G J Westendorp; E L E M Bollen; P W de Bruin; H A M Middelkoop; M A van Buchem; J van der Grond
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2008-11-20       Impact factor: 13.501

View more
  5 in total

1.  Hippocampal (subfield) volume and shape in relation to cognitive performance across the adult lifespan.

Authors:  Aristotle N Voineskos; Julie L Winterburn; Daniel Felsky; Jon Pipitone; Tarek K Rajji; Benoit H Mulsant; M Mallar Chakravarty
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2015-05-09       Impact factor: 5.038

2.  Expected Label Value Computation for Atlas-Based Image Segmentation.

Authors:  Iman Aganj; Bruce Fischl
Journal:  Proc IEEE Int Symp Biomed Imaging       Date:  2019-07-11

3.  Multiprotocol, multiatlas statistical fusion: theory and application.

Authors:  Andrew J Plassard; Bennett A Landman
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2017-08-28

Review 4.  Multi-atlas segmentation of biomedical images: A survey.

Authors:  Juan Eugenio Iglesias; Mert R Sabuncu
Journal:  Med Image Anal       Date:  2015-07-06       Impact factor: 8.545

5.  Multi-Atlas Image Soft Segmentation via Computation of the Expected Label Value.

Authors:  Iman Aganj; Bruce Fischl
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 10.048

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.