Literature DB >> 29171108

Optimization and validation of automated hippocampal subfield segmentation across the lifespan.

Andrew R Bender1, Attila Keresztes1, Nils C Bodammer1, Yee Lee Shing1,2, Markus Werkle-Bergner1, Ana M Daugherty3, Qijing Yu4, Simone Kühn1,5, Ulman Lindenberger1,6,7, Naftali Raz1,4.   

Abstract

Automated segmentation of hippocampal (HC) subfields from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is gaining popularity, but automated procedures that afford high speed and reproducibility have yet to be extensively validated against the standard, manual morphometry. We evaluated the concurrent validity of an automated method for hippocampal subfields segmentation (automated segmentation of hippocampal subfields, ASHS; Yushkevich et al., ) using a customized atlas of the HC body, with manual morphometry as a standard. We built a series of customized atlases comprising the entorhinal cortex (ERC) and subfields of the HC body from manually segmented images, and evaluated the correspondence of automated segmentations with manual morphometry. In samples with age ranges of 6-24 and 62-79 years, 20 participants each, we obtained validity coefficients (intraclass correlations, ICC) and spatial overlap measures (dice similarity coefficient) that varied substantially across subfields. Anterior and posterior HC body evidenced the greatest discrepancies between automated and manual segmentations. Adding anterior and posterior slices for atlas creation and truncating automated output to the ranges manually defined by multiple neuroanatomical landmarks substantially improved the validity of automated segmentation, yielding ICC above 0.90 for all subfields and alleviating systematic bias. We cross-validated the developed atlas on an independent sample of 30 healthy adults (age 31-84) and obtained good to excellent agreement: ICC (2) = 0.70-0.92. Thus, with described customization steps implemented by experts trained in MRI neuroanatomy, ASHS shows excellent concurrent validity, and can become a promising method for studying age-related changes in HC subfield volumes.
© 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  MRI; aging; development; hippocampus; morphometry; validation; volume

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29171108      PMCID: PMC5861710          DOI: 10.1002/hbm.23891

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


  35 in total

1.  A global optimisation method for robust affine registration of brain images.

Authors:  M Jenkinson; S Smith
Journal:  Med Image Anal       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 8.545

2.  Improved optimization for the robust and accurate linear registration and motion correction of brain images.

Authors:  Mark Jenkinson; Peter Bannister; Michael Brady; Stephen Smith
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 6.556

3.  A reliable and valid method for manual demarcation of hippocampal head, body, and tail.

Authors:  Ana M Daugherty; Qijing Yu; Robert Flinn; Noa Ofen
Journal:  Int J Dev Neurosci       Date:  2015-02-07       Impact factor: 2.457

4.  A computational atlas of the hippocampal formation using ex vivo, ultra-high resolution MRI: Application to adaptive segmentation of in vivo MRI.

Authors:  Juan Eugenio Iglesias; Jean C Augustinack; Khoa Nguyen; Christopher M Player; Allison Player; Michelle Wright; Nicole Roy; Matthew P Frosch; Ann C McKee; Lawrence L Wald; Bruce Fischl; Koen Van Leemput
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2015-04-29       Impact factor: 6.556

5.  Sex differences in the effect of puberty on hippocampal morphology.

Authors:  Theodore D Satterthwaite; Simon Vandekar; Daniel H Wolf; Kosha Ruparel; David R Roalf; Chad Jackson; Mark A Elliott; Warren B Bilker; Monica E Calkins; Karthik Prabhakaran; Christos Davatzikos; Hakon Hakonarson; Raquel E Gur; Ruben C Gur
Journal:  J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry       Date:  2013-12-20       Impact factor: 8.829

6.  Cohort profile: The Berlin Aging Study II (BASE-II).

Authors:  Lars Bertram; Anke Böckenhoff; Ilja Demuth; Sandra Düzel; Rahel Eckardt; Shu-Chen Li; Ulman Lindenberger; Graham Pawelec; Thomas Siedler; Gert G Wagner; Elisabeth Steinhagen-Thiessen
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2013-03-14       Impact factor: 7.196

7.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-08       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  Age differences in hippocampal subfield volumes from childhood to late adulthood.

Authors:  Ana M Daugherty; Andrew R Bender; Naftali Raz; Noa Ofen
Journal:  Hippocampus       Date:  2015-09-04       Impact factor: 3.899

9.  Multi-Atlas Segmentation with Joint Label Fusion.

Authors:  Hongzhi Wang; Jung W Suh; Sandhitsu R Das; John B Pluta; Caryne Craige; Paul A Yushkevich
Journal:  IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell       Date:  2012-06-26       Impact factor: 6.226

Review 10.  FSL.

Authors:  Mark Jenkinson; Christian F Beckmann; Timothy E J Behrens; Mark W Woolrich; Stephen M Smith
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2011-09-16       Impact factor: 6.556

View more
  8 in total

1.  Optimization and validation of automated hippocampal subfield segmentation across the lifespan.

Authors:  Andrew R Bender; Attila Keresztes; Nils C Bodammer; Yee Lee Shing; Markus Werkle-Bergner; Ana M Daugherty; Qijing Yu; Simone Kühn; Ulman Lindenberger; Naftali Raz
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2017-11-23       Impact factor: 5.038

2.  Automated segmentation of medial temporal lobe subregions on in vivo T1-weighted MRI in early stages of Alzheimer's disease.

Authors:  Long Xie; Laura E M Wisse; John Pluta; Robin de Flores; Virgine Piskin; Jose V Manjón; Hongzhi Wang; Sandhitsu R Das; Song-Lin Ding; David A Wolk; Paul A Yushkevich
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2019-04-29       Impact factor: 5.038

3.  Hippocampal Subfields and Limbic White Matter Jointly Predict Learning Rate in Older Adults.

Authors:  Andrew R Bender; Andreas M Brandmaier; Sandra Düzel; Attila Keresztes; Ofer Pasternak; Ulman Lindenberger; Simone Kühn
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2020-04-14       Impact factor: 5.357

Review 4.  Hippocampal Maturation Drives Memory from Generalization to Specificity.

Authors:  Attila Keresztes; Chi T Ngo; Ulman Lindenberger; Markus Werkle-Bergner; Nora S Newcombe
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2018-06-19       Impact factor: 20.229

5.  Magnetic Resonance Elastography of Human Hippocampal Subfields: CA3-Dentate Gyrus Viscoelasticity Predicts Relational Memory Accuracy.

Authors:  Ana M Daugherty; Hillary D Schwarb; Matthew D J McGarry; Curtis L Johnson; Neal J Cohen
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2020-05-07       Impact factor: 3.225

6.  Oscillatory Mechanisms of Successful Memory Formation in Younger and Older Adults Are Related to Structural Integrity.

Authors:  Myriam C Sander; Yana Fandakova; Thomas H Grandy; Yee Lee Shing; Markus Werkle-Bergner
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2020-05-18       Impact factor: 5.357

7.  Test-retest reliability of hippocampal subfield volumes in a developmental sample: Implications for longitudinal developmental studies.

Authors:  Roya Homayouni; Qijing Yu; Sruthi Ramesh; Lingfei Tang; Ana M Daugherty; Noa Ofen
Journal:  J Neurosci Res       Date:  2021-03-22       Impact factor: 4.433

8.  No evidence for association between late pregnancy maternal cortisol and gray matter volume in a healthy community sample of young adolescents.

Authors:  Anna Tyborowska; Katharina Gruber; Roseriet Beijers; Simone Kühn; Karin Roelofs; Carolina de Weerth
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2022-08-31       Impact factor: 5.152

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.