Valid and efficient manual estimates of intracranial volume from magnetic resonance images

BackgroundManual segmentations of the whole intracranial vault in high-resolution magnetic resonance images are often regarded as very time-consuming. Therefore it is common to only segment a few linearly spaced intracranial areas to estimate the whole volume. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate how the validity of intracranial volume estimates is affected by the chosen interpolation method, orientation of the intracranial areas and the linear spacing between them.MethodsIntracranial volumes were manually segmented on 62 participants from the Gothenburg MCI study using 1.5 T, T1-weighted magnetic resonance images. Estimates of the intracranial volumes were then derived using subsamples of linearly spaced coronal, sagittal or transversal intracranial areas from the same volumes. The subsamples of intracranial areas were interpolated into volume estimates by three different interpolation methods. The linear spacing between the intracranial areas ranged from 2 to 50 mm and the validity of the estimates was determined by comparison with the entire intracranial volumes.ResultsA progressive decrease in intra-class correlation and an increase in percentage error could be seen with increased linear spacing between intracranial areas. With small linear spacing (≤15 mm), orientation of the intracranial areas and interpolation method had negligible effects on the validity. With larger linear spacing, the best validity was achieved using cubic spline interpolation with either coronal or sagittal intracranial areas. Even at a linear spacing of 50 mm, cubic spline interpolation on either coronal or sagittal intracranial areas had a mean absolute agreement intra-class correlation with the entire intracranial volumes above 0.97.ConclusionCubic spline interpolation in combination with linearly spaced sagittal or coronal intracranial areas overall resulted in the most valid and robust estimates of intracranial volume. Using this method, valid ICV estimates could be obtained in less than five minutes per patient.

[1]  R. Camicioli,et al.  Intact limbic-prefrontal connections and reduced amygdala volumes in Parkinson's disease with mild depressive symptoms. , 2012, Parkinsonism & related disorders.

[2]  John Ashburner,et al.  SPM: A history , 2012, NeuroImage.

[3]  K. McGraw,et al.  Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. , 1996 .

[4]  Magnus Borga,et al.  Hippocampal volumes in patients exposed to low-dose radiation to the basal brain. A case–control study in long-term survivors from cancer in the head and neck region , 2012, Radiation oncology.

[5]  Alexander Hammers,et al.  Magnetic resonance volumetry reveals focal brain atrophy in transient epileptic amnesia , 2013, Epilepsy & Behavior.

[6]  Abraham Z. Snyder,et al.  A unified approach for morphometric and functional data analysis in young, old, and demented adults using automated atlas-based head size normalization: reliability and validation against manual measurement of total intracranial volume , 2004, NeuroImage.

[7]  Joseph V. Hajnal,et al.  A robust method to estimate the intracranial volume across MRI field strengths (1.5T and 3T) , 2010, NeuroImage.

[8]  Thomas Martin Deserno,et al.  Survey: interpolation methods in medical image processing , 1999, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[9]  R. Marc Lebel,et al.  In vivo quantification of hippocampal subfields using 4.7 T fast spin echo imaging , 2010, NeuroImage.

[10]  Jennifer L. Whitwell,et al.  Accurate automatic estimation of total intracranial volume: A nuisance variable with less nuisance , 2015, NeuroImage.

[11]  Nick C Fox,et al.  Normalization of cerebral volumes by use of intracranial volume: implications for longitudinal quantitative MR imaging. , 2001, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[12]  B. Reisberg,et al.  Global Deterioration Scale (GDS). , 1988, Psychopharmacology bulletin.

[13]  Guy B. Williams,et al.  Comparative Reliability of Total Intracranial Volume Estimation Methods and the Influence of Atrophy in a Longitudinal Semantic Dementia Cohort , 2009, Journal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of Neuroimaging.

[14]  P. Seres,et al.  High field structural MRI reveals specific episodic memory correlates in the subfields of the hippocampus , 2014, Neuropsychologia.

[15]  M. Borga,et al.  Small baseline volume of left hippocampus is associated with subsequent conversion of MCI into dementia: The Göteborg MCI study , 2008, Journal of the Neurological Sciences.

[16]  Lars Johansson,et al.  Intracranial volume estimated with commonly used methods could introduce bias in studies including brain volume measurements , 2013, NeuroImage.

[17]  K. Blennow,et al.  Progression from Mild to Pronounced MCI Is Not Associated with Cerebrospinal Fluid Biomarker Deviations , 2011, Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders.

[18]  P. Maruff,et al.  An optimized method for estimating intracranial volume from magnetic resonance images , 2000, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[19]  Till-Karsten Hauser,et al.  Genotype-specific patterns of atrophy progression are more sensitive than clinical decline in SCA1, SCA3 and SCA6. , 2013, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[20]  Sylvie Belleville,et al.  Predicting progression to dementia in elderly subjects with mild cognitive impairment using both cognitive and neuroimaging predictors. , 2013, Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD.

[21]  J. Sepkoski,et al.  Quantified coefficients of association and measurement of similarity , 1974 .

[22]  Ulman Lindenberger,et al.  Trajectories of brain aging in middle-aged and older adults: Regional and individual differences , 2010, NeuroImage.