Automated Analysis of Fundamental Features of Brain Structures

Automated image analysis of the brain should include measures of fundamental structural features such as size and shape. We used principal axes (P-A) measurements to measure overall size and shape of brain structures segmented from MR brain images. The rationale was that quantitative volumetric studies of brain structures would benefit from shape standardization as had been shown for whole brain studies. P-A analysis software was extended to include controls for variability in position and orientation to support individual structure spatial normalization (ISSN). The rationale was that ISSN would provide a bias-free means to remove elementary sources of a structure’s spatial variability in preparation for more detailed analyses. We studied nine brain structures (whole brain, cerebral hemispheres, cerebellum, brainstem, caudate, putamen, hippocampus, inferior frontal gyrus, and precuneus) from the 40-brain LPBA40 atlas. This paper provides the first report of anatomical positions and principal axes orientations within a standard reference frame, in addition to “shape/size related” principal axes measures, for the nine brain structures from the LPBA40 atlas. Analysis showed that overall size (mean volume) for internal brain structures was preserved using shape standardization while variance was reduced by more than 50%. Shape standardization provides increased statistical power for between-group volumetric studies of brain structures compared to volumetric studies that control only for whole brain size. To test ISSN’s ability to control for spatial variability of brain structures we evaluated the overlap of 40 regions of interest (ROIs) in a standard reference frame for the nine different brain structures before and after processing. Standardizations of orientation or shape were ineffective when not combined with position standardization. The greatest reduction in spatial variability was seen for combined standardizations of position, orientation and shape. These results show that ISSNs automated processing can be a valuable asset for measuring and controlling variability of fundamental features of brain structures.

[1]  J Mazziotta,et al.  A probabilistic atlas and reference system for the human brain: International Consortium for Brain Mapping (ICBM). , 2001, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[2]  Arthur W. Toga,et al.  Construction of a 3D probabilistic atlas of human cortical structures , 2008, NeuroImage.

[3]  P. K. Banerjee,et al.  Registration revisited , 1993, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[4]  J. F. Bradshaw,et al.  The principal axes transformation--a method for image registration. , 1990, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[5]  Jack L. Lancaster,et al.  Talairach space as a tool for intersubject standardization in the brain , 2000 .

[6]  Arthur W. Toga,et al.  Anatomical Global Spatial Normalization , 2010, Neuroinformatics.

[7]  Karl Zilles,et al.  Limitations of the principal-axes theory , 1997, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[8]  G. Dawson,et al.  Brain structural abnormalities in young children with autism spectrum disorder , 2002, Neurology.

[9]  E. Krause,et al.  Taxicab Geometry: An Adventure in Non-Euclidean Geometry , 1987 .

[10]  J. Rapoport,et al.  Variability of human brain structure size: ages 4–20 years , 1997, Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging.

[11]  Arthur W. Toga,et al.  A Probabilistic Atlas of the Human Brain: Theory and Rationale for Its Development The International Consortium for Brain Mapping (ICBM) , 1995, NeuroImage.

[12]  K. Amunts,et al.  Localized morphological brain differences between English-speaking Caucasians and Chinese-speaking Asians: new evidence of anatomical plasticity , 2003, Neuroreport.

[13]  Alan C. Evans,et al.  Statistical Sulcal Shape Comparisons: Application to the Detection of Genetic Encoding of the Central Sulcus Shape , 2000, NeuroImage.

[14]  Arthur W Toga,et al.  Genetic Contributions to Altered Callosal Morphology in Schizophrenia , 2002, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[15]  D. Collins,et al.  Automatic 3D Intersubject Registration of MR Volumetric Data in Standardized Talairach Space , 1994, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[16]  Terry M. Peters,et al.  3D statistical neuroanatomical models from 305 MRI volumes , 1993, 1993 IEEE Conference Record Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference.

[17]  Stephanie Powell,et al.  Registration and machine learning-based automated segmentation of subcortical and cerebellar brain structures , 2008, NeuroImage.

[18]  P. Lang,et al.  Constructing a 0 Tesla MR scanner , 2000, NeuroImage.

[19]  D. Louis Collins,et al.  Brain morphometry using 3D moment invariants , 2004, Medical Image Anal..

[20]  Alan C. Evans,et al.  Multiple surface identification and matching in magnetic resonance images , 1994, Other Conferences.

[21]  Isaac N. Bankman,et al.  Handbook of medical image processing and analysis , 2009 .

[22]  Richard S. J. Frackowiak,et al.  Navigation-related structural change in the hippocampi of taxi drivers. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[23]  Tyrone D. Cannon,et al.  Genetic influences on brain structure , 2001, Nature Neuroscience.