Comparison of Automated Brain Volume Measures obtained with NeuroQuant® and FreeSurfer

Journal of Neuroimaging

Volumn 25, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 721-727

  Ochs, Alfred L ^a,b   Ross, David E ^a,c   Zannoni, Megan D ^a   Abildskov, Tracy J ^d   Bigler, Erin D ^d,e   For the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative, ^a  

^a Virginia Institute of Neuropsychiatry   (United States)

^b Virginia Commonwealth University   (United States)

^c VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^d BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF UTAH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Brain morphometry; Freesurfer; Neuroquant ; Pallidum; Reliability

Indexed keywords

AGED; ALZHEIMER DISEASE; AMYGDALOID NUCLEUS; ARTICLE; AUTOMATION; BRAIN SIZE; BRAIN STEM; CAUDATE NUCLEUS; CEREBELLUM; CEREBROSPINAL FLUID; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; DIENCEPHALON; EFFECT SIZE; FEMALE; FOREBRAIN; GLOBUS PALLIDUS; GRAY MATTER; HIPPOCAMPUS; HUMAN; IMAGING SOFTWARE; LATERAL BRAIN VENTRICLE; MALE; NEUROIMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SCANNER; PUTAMEN; RELIABILITY; THALAMUS; TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY; WHITE MATTER; ALGORITHM; AUTOMATED PATTERN RECOGNITION; BRAIN; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; EVALUATION STUDY; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; ORGAN SIZE; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; REPRODUCIBILITY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SOFTWARE; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING;

AGED; ALGORITHMS; ALZHEIMER DISEASE; BRAIN; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; ORGAN SIZE; PATTERN RECOGNITION, AUTOMATED; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SOFTWARE;

EID: 84939255973     PISSN: 10512284     EISSN: 15526569     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/jon.12229     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Jenkinson M, Beckmann CF, Behrens TE, et al. FSL. NeuroImage 2012;62:782-90.
2. Smith SM, Jenkinson M, Woolrich MW, et al. Advances in functional and structural MR image analysis and implementation as FSL. NeuroImage 2004;23(Suppl 1):S208-19.
3. Ashburner J, Friston KJ. Voxel-based morphometry-the methods. NeuroImage 2000;11:805-21.
4. Fischl B. FreeSurfer. NeuroImage 2012;62:774-81.
5. Brewer JB. Fully-automated volumetric MRI with normative ranges: translation to clinical practice. Behav Neurol 2009;21:21-8.
6. Carmichael OT, Aizenstein HA, Davis SW, et al. Atlas-based hippocampus segmentation in Alzheimer's disease and mild cognitive impairment. NeuroImage 2005;27:979-90.
7. Fischl B, Salat DH, Busa E, et al. Whole brain segmentation: automated labeling of neuroanatomical structures in the human brain. Neuron 2002;33:341-55.
8. Jatzko A, Rothenhofer S, Schmitt A, et al. Hippocampal volume in chronic posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD): MRI study using two different evaluation methods. J Affect Disorders 2006;94:121-6.
9. Morey RA, Petty CM, Xu Y, et al. A comparison of automated segmentation and manual tracing for quantifying hippocampal and amygdala volumes. NeuroImage 2009;45:855-66.
10. Testa C, Laakso MP, Sabattoli F, et al. A comparison between the accuracy of voxel-based morphometry and hippocampal volumetry in Alzheimer's disease. JMRI-J Magn Reson Im 2004;19:274-82.
11. Voets NL, Hough MG, Douaud G, et al. Evidence for abnormalities of cortical development in adolescent-onset schizophrenia. NeuroImage 2008;43:665-75.
12. Stein JL, Medland SE, Vasquez AA, et al. Identification of common variants associated with human hippocampal and intracranial volumes. Nat Genet 2012;44:552-61.
13. Morey RA, Selgrade ES, Wagner HR 2nd, et al. Scan-rescan reliability of subcortical brain volumes derived from automated segmentation. Hum Brain Mapp 2010;31:1751-62.
14. Mulder ER, de Jong RA, Knol DL, et al. Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging I. Hippocampal volume change measurement: quantitative assessment of the reproducibility of expert manual outlining and the automated methods FreeSurfer and FIRST. NeuroImage 2014;92:169-81.
15. Birk S. Hippocampal atrophy: biomarker for early AD? Intern Med News 2009;9:12.
16. Heister D, Brewer JB, Magda S, et al. Predicting MCI outcome with clinically available MRI and CSF biomarkers. Neurology 2011;77:1619-28.
17. Kovacevic S, Rafii MS, Brewer JB. Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging I. High-throughput, fully automated volumetry for prediction of MMSE and CDR decline in mild cognitive impairment. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord 2009;23:139-45.
18. Desikan RS, Rafii MS, Brewer JB, et al. An expanded role for neuroimaging in the evaluation of memory impairment. Am J Neuroradiol 2013; 34:2075-82.
19. McEvoy LK, Brewer JB. Biomarkers for the clinical evaluation of the cognitively impaired elderly: amyloid is not enough. Imaging in Medicine 2012;4:343-57.
20. Brewer JB, Magda S, Airriess C, et al. Fully-automated quantification of regional brain volumes for improved detection of focal atrophy in Alzheimer disease. Am J Neuroradiol 2009;30:578-80.
21. McEvoy LK, Brewer JB. Quantitative structural MRI for early detection of Alzheimer's disease. Expert Rev Neurotherapeutics 2010;10:1675-88.
22. Ross DE, Graham TJ, Ochs AL. Review of the evidence supporting the medical and legal use of neuroquant® in patients with traumatic brain injury. Psychol Inj Law 2012;6:75-80.
23. Ross DE, Castelvecchi C, Ochs AL. Brain MRI volumetry in a single patient with mild traumatic brain injury. Brain Injury 2013;27:634-6.
24. Ross DE, Ochs AL, Seabaugh JM, et al. Progressive brain atrophy in patients with chronic neuropsychiatric symptoms after mild traumatic brain injury: a preliminary study. Brain Injury 2012;26:1500-9.
25. Ross DE, Ochs AL, Seabaugh JM, et al. Man versus machine: comparison of radiologists' interpretations and NeuroQuant® volumetric analysis of brain MRIs in patients with traumatic brain injury. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 2013;25:1-8.
26. Ross DE, Ochs AL, DeSmit ME, et al. Man vs. machine Part 2: comparison of radiologists' interpretations and NeuroQuant measures of brain asymmetry and progressive atrophy in patients with traumatic brain injury. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 2015;27:147-52.
27. Ross DE, Ochs AL, Zannoni MD, et al. Back to the future: estimating pre-injury brain volume in patients with traumatic brain injury. NeuroImage 2014;102P2:565-78.
28. Brezova V, Moen KG, Skandsen T, et al. Prospective longitudinal MRI study of brain volumes and diffusion changes during the first year after moderate to severe traumatic brain injury. NeuroImage Clin 2014;5:128-40.
29. Farid N, Girard HM, Kemmotsu N, et al. Temporal lobe epilepsy: quantitative MR volumetry in detection of hippocampal atrophy. Radiology 2012;264:542-50.
30. Bigler ED, Abildskov TJ, Wilde EA, et al. Diffuse damage in pediatric traumatic brain injury: a comparison of automated versus operator-controlled quantification methods. NeuroImage 2010;50:1017-26.
31. Gronenschild EH, Habets P, Jacobs HI, et al. The effects of FreeSurfer version, workstation type, and Macintosh operating system version on anatomical volume and cortical thickness measurements. PloS ONE 2012;7:e38234.
32. Jovicich J, Czanner S, Han X, et al. MRI-derived measurements of human subcortical, ventricular and intracranial brain volumes: reliability effects of scan sessions, acquisition sequences, data analyses, scanner upgrade, scanner vendors and field strengths. NeuroImage 2009;46:177-92.
33. Jack CR Jr, Bernstein MA, Fox NC, et al. The Alzheimer's disease neuroimaging initiative (ADNI): MRI methods. JMRI-J Magn Reson Im 2008;27:685-91.
34. Petersen RC, Aisen PS, Beckett LA, et al. Alzheimer's disease neuroimaging initiative (ADNI): clinical characterization. Neurology 2010;74:201-9.
35. Weiner MW, Aisen PS, Jack CR Jr, et al. The Alzheimer's disease neuroimaging initiative: progress report and future plans. Alzheimers Dement 2010;6:202-11.
36. Davids M, Zollner FG, Ruttorf M, et al. Fully-automated quality assurance in multi-center studies using MRI phantom measurements. Magn Reson Imaging 2014;32:771-80.
37. Menon DK, Schwab K, Wright DW, et al. Demographics, Clinical Assessment Working Group of the I, Interagency Initiative toward Common Data Elements for Research on Traumatic Brain I, Psychological H. Position statement: definition of traumatic brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehab 2010;91:1637-40.
38. Kay T, Harrington DE, Adams R, et al. Definition of mild traumatic brain injury. J Head Trauma Rehab 1993;8:86-7.
39. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 1979;86:420-8.
40. Fleiss JL. The Design and Analysis of Clinical Experiments. New York: Wiley, 1986.
41. Coe R. It's the effect size, stupid: what effect size is and why it is important. 2002. URL: http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/00002182.htm
42. Olejnik S, Algina J. Measures of effect size for comparative studies: applications, interpretations, and limitations. Contemp Educ Psychol 2000;25:241-86.
43. Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1988.
44. MRI Scanner Protocols. URL: http://adni.loni.usc.edu/methods/documents/mri-protocols/
45. Han X, Jovicich J, Salat D, et al. Reliability of MRI-derived measurements of human cerebral cortical thickness: the effects of field strength, scanner upgrade and manufacturer. NeuroImage 2006;32:180-94.
46. Jovicich J, Czanner S, Greve D, et al. Reliability in multi-site structural MRI studies: effects of gradient non-linearity correction on phantom and human data. NeuroImage 2006;30:436-43.
47. Wonderlick JS, Ziegler DA, Hosseini-Varnamkhasti P, et al. Reliability of MRI-derived cortical and subcortical morphometric measures: effects of pulse sequence, voxel geometry, and parallel imaging. NeuroImage 2009;44:1324-33.
48. FreeSurfer Download. 2013. URL: http://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/Download