| Literature DB >> 35462574 |
Roland Opfer1, Julia Krüger1, Lothar Spies1, Hagen H Kitzler2, Sven Schippling3, Ralph Buchert4.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Total intracranial volume (TIV) is often a nuisance covariate in MRI-based brain volumetry. This study compared two TIV adjustment methods with respect to their impact on z-scores in single subject analyses of regional brain volume estimates.Entities:
Keywords: Age; Brain parenchyma; Hippocampus; MRI; Thalamus; Total intracranial volume
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35462574 PMCID: PMC9474386 DOI: 10.1007/s00234-022-02961-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Neuroradiology ISSN: 0028-3940 Impact factor: 2.995
Fig. 1Final regression models of the relationship of ROIV with TIV and age obtained for the residual method (top left: BPV, top right: THALV, bottom: HIPPV)
Fig. 2Scatter plots of ROIF versus TIV (left) and the final regression models of the relationship of ROIF with age for the proportion method (right) (top: BP, middle: THAL, bottom: HIPP)
Mean value, standard deviation (SD), and coefficient of variance (CoV[%] = 100 × SD/mean) of adjusted and non-adjusted volume estimates of brain parenchyma (BP), bilateral thalamus (THAL), and bilateral hippocampus (HIPP) in the normal database. The last two columns give the Pearson correlation coefficients with TIV and age. Statistically significant (P < .0001) correlations are marked with an asterisk
| Residual method | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROI | Adjustment | Volume (ROIV) | Correlation with | |||
| Mean [ml] | CoV [%] | TIV | age | |||
| BP ( | No adjustment | 1112.66 | 117.28 | 10.54 | 0.79* | − 0.40* |
| After adjustment | 0.00 | 40.96 | 3.68 | 0.00 | − 0.00 | |
| THAL ( | No adjustment | 14.97 | 1.67 | 11.17 | 0.52* | − 0.57* |
| After adjustment | 0.00 | 0.89 | 5.95 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |
| HIPP ( | No adjustment | 7.16 | 0.81 | 11.26 | 0.42* | − 0.38* |
| After adjustment | 0.00 | 0.58 | 8.16 | − 0.00 | − 0.00 | |
| Proportion method | ||||||
| ROI | Adjustment | Proportion of TIV (ROIF) | Correlation with | |||
| Mean [%] | CoV [%] | TIV | Age | |||
| BP ( | No adjustment | 81.3 | 5.45 | 6.70 | − 0.31* | − 0.76* |
| After adjustment | 0.00 | 3.28 | 4.04 | − 0.39* | − 0.00 | |
| THAL ( | No adjustment | 1.10 | 0.11 | 10.41 | − 0.42* | − 0.70* |
| After adjustment | 0.00 | 0.08 | 7.14 | − 0.52* | 0.00 | |
| HIPP ( | No adjustment | 0.52 | 0.06 | 11.41 | − 0.45* | − 0.45* |
| After adjustment | 0.00 | 0.05 | 9.65 | − 0.52* | − 0.00 | |
Absolute difference of regional brain volume z-scores with the proportion method minus the residual method (abs(z-diff)) in the normal database
| ROI | Mean | 95th percentile | Max |
|---|---|---|---|
| BPV | 0.34 | 0.86 | 2.00 |
| THALV | 0.46 | 1.11 | 2.05 |
| HIPPV | 0.44 | 1.09 | 2.20 |
Fig. 3Scatter plots of z-diff versus TIV (top) and versus age (bottom) (left: BP, middle: THAL, right: HIPP)