Literature DB >> 30511116

FreeSurfer 5.3 versus 6.0: are volumes comparable? A Chronic Effects of Neurotrauma Consortium study.

Erin D Bigler1, Marc Skiles2, Benjamin S C Wade3,4,5, Tracy J Abildskov2, Nick J Tustison6, Randall S Scheibel7, Mary R Newsome7, Andrew R Mayer8, James R Stone6, Brian A Taylor9, David F Tate3, William C Walker9, Harvey S Levin7, Elisabeth A Wilde7,10.   

Abstract

Automated neuroimaging methods like FreeSurfer ( https://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/ ) have revolutionized quantitative neuroimaging analyses. Such analyses provide a variety of metrics used for image quantification, including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) volumetrics. With the release of FreeSurfer version 6.0, it is important to assess its comparability to the widely-used previous version 5.3. The current study used data from the initial 249 participants in the ongoing Chronic Effects of Neurotrauma Consortium (CENC) multicenter observational study to compare the volumetric output of versions 5.3 and 6.0 across various regions of interest (ROI). In the current investigation, the following ROIs were examined: total intracranial volume, total white matter volume, total ventricular volume, total gray matter volume, and right and left volumes for the thalamus, pallidum, putamen, caudate, amygdala and hippocampus. Absolute ROI volumes derived from FreeSurfer 6.0 differed significantly from those obtained using version 5.3. We also employed a clinically-based evaluation strategy to compare both versions in their prediction of age-mediated volume reductions (or ventricular increase) in the aforementioned structures. Statistical comparison involved both general linear modeling (GLM) and random forest (RF) methods, where cross-validation error was significantly higher using segmentations from FreeSurfer version 5.3 versus version 6.0 (GLM: t = 4.97, df = 99, p value = 2.706e-06; RF: t = 4.85, df = 99, p value = 4.424e-06). Additionally, the relative importance of ROIs used to predict age using RFs differed between FreeSurfer versions, indicating substantial differences in the two versions. However, from the perspective of correlational analyses, fitted regression lines and their slopes were similar between the two versions, regardless of version used. While absolute volumes are not interchangeable between version 5.3 and 6.0, ROI correlational analyses appear to yield similar results, suggesting the interchangeability of ROI volume for correlational studies.

Entities:  

Keywords:  FreeSurfer; MRI volumetrics; Quantitative neuroimaging; Version 5.3; Version 6.0

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 30511116     DOI: 10.1007/s11682-018-9994-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brain Imaging Behav        ISSN: 1931-7557            Impact factor:   3.978


  6 in total

1.  Different FreeSurfer versions might generate different statistical outcomes in case-control comparison studies.

Authors:  Pavel Filip; Petr Bednarik; Lynn E Eberly; Amir Moheet; Alena Svatkova; Heidi Grohn; Anjali F Kumar; Elizabeth R Seaquist; Silvia Mangia
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  2022-01-06       Impact factor: 2.804

2.  Neuroimaging PheWAS (Phenome-Wide Association Study): A Free Cloud-Computing Platform for Big-Data, Brain-Wide Imaging Association Studies.

Authors:  Lu Zhao; Ishaan Batta; William Matloff; Caroline O'Driscoll; Samuel Hobel; Arthur W Toga
Journal:  Neuroinformatics       Date:  2021-04

3.  Estimates of brain age for gray matter and white matter in younger and older adults: Insights into human intelligence.

Authors:  Ehsan Shokri-Kojori; Ilana J Bennett; Zuri A Tomeldan; Daniel C Krawczyk; Bart Rypma
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  2021-03-15       Impact factor: 3.610

4.  Mothers' Attachment Representations and Children's Brain Structure.

Authors:  Megan H Fitter; Jessica A Stern; Martha D Straske; Tamara Allard; Jude Cassidy; Tracy Riggins
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2022-03-16       Impact factor: 3.169

5.  Qualitative and Quantitative Comparison of Hippocampal Volumetric Software Applications: Do All Roads Lead to Rome?

Authors:  Stephanie Mangesius; Lukas Haider; Lukas Lenhart; Ruth Steiger; Ferran Prados Carrasco; Christoph Scherfler; Elke R Gizewski
Journal:  Biomedicines       Date:  2022-02-12

6.  Polygenic score for Alzheimer's disease identifies differential atrophy in hippocampal subfield volumes.

Authors:  Balaji Kannappan; Tamil Iniyan Gunasekaran; Jan Te Nijenhuis; Muthu Gopal; Deepika Velusami; Gugan Kothandan; Kun Ho Lee
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-07-13       Impact factor: 3.752

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.