PURPOSE: To test automated three-dimensional magnetic resonance (MR) imaging morphometry of the human hippocampus, to determine the potential gain in precision compared with conventional manual morphometry. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A canonical three-dimensional MR image atlas was used as a deformable template and automatically matched to three-dimensional MR images of 10 individuals (five healthy and five schizophrenic subjects). A subvolume containing the hippocampus was defined by using 16 landmarks that constrained the automated search for hippocampal boundaries. Transformation of the hippocampus template was automatically performed by using global pattern matching through a sequence of low-then high-dimensional translations, rotations, and scalings. RESULTS: The average test-retest volume difference measured with the automatic method was 3.1%, compared with the manual test-retest difference of 7.1%. Correlation between automated and manually determined volumes demonstrated the validity of the automated technique (intraclass correlation coefficient = .86). CONCLUSION: The automated method estimates hippocampal volumes with less variability (ie, lower variance) than that of manual out-lining.
PURPOSE: To test automated three-dimensional magnetic resonance (MR) imaging morphometry of the human hippocampus, to determine the potential gain in precision compared with conventional manual morphometry. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A canonical three-dimensional MR image atlas was used as a deformable template and automatically matched to three-dimensional MR images of 10 individuals (five healthy and five schizophrenic subjects). A subvolume containing the hippocampus was defined by using 16 landmarks that constrained the automated search for hippocampal boundaries. Transformation of the hippocampus template was automatically performed by using global pattern matching through a sequence of low-then high-dimensional translations, rotations, and scalings. RESULTS: The average test-retest volume difference measured with the automatic method was 3.1%, compared with the manual test-retest difference of 7.1%. Correlation between automated and manually determined volumes demonstrated the validity of the automated technique (intraclass correlation coefficient = .86). CONCLUSION: The automated method estimates hippocampal volumes with less variability (ie, lower variance) than that of manual out-lining.
Authors: Marina Boccardi; Rossana Ganzola; Martina Bocchetta; Michela Pievani; Alberto Redolfi; George Bartzokis; Richard Camicioli; John G Csernansky; Mony J de Leon; Leyla deToledo-Morrell; Ronald J Killiany; Stéphane Lehéricy; Johannes Pantel; Jens C Pruessner; H Soininen; Craig Watson; Simon Duchesne; Clifford R Jack; Giovanni B Frisoni Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2011 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: Joan L Luby; Deanna M Barch; Andy Belden; Michael S Gaffrey; Rebecca Tillman; Casey Babb; Tomoyuki Nishino; Hideo Suzuki; Kelly N Botteron Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2012-01-30 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: D Mungas; D Harvey; B R Reed; W J Jagust; C DeCarli; L Beckett; W J Mack; J H Kramer; M W Weiner; N Schuff; H C Chui Journal: Neurology Date: 2005-08-23 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: R E Hogan; L Wang; M E Bertrand; L J Willmore; R D Bucholz; A S Nassif; J G Csernansky Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2006 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Lei Wang; J Philp Miller; Mokhtar H Gado; Daniel W McKeel; Marcus Rothermich; Michael I Miller; John C Morris; John G Csernansky Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2005-10-21 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Jorge Jovicich; Silvester Czanner; Xiao Han; David Salat; Andre van der Kouwe; Brian Quinn; Jenni Pacheco; Marilyn Albert; Ronald Killiany; Deborah Blacker; Paul Maguire; Diana Rosas; Nikos Makris; Randy Gollub; Anders Dale; Bradford C Dickerson; Bruce Fischl Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2009-02-20 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Paul A Yushkevich; Brian B Avants; Sandhitsu R Das; John Pluta; Murat Altinay; Caryne Craige Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2009-12-31 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Lei Wang; Daniel Mamah; Michael P Harms; Meghana Karnik; Joseph L Price; Mokhtar H Gado; Paul A Thompson; Deanna M Barch; Michael I Miller; John G Csernansky Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2008-09-23 Impact factor: 13.382