Quantitation of T2 lesion load in patients with multiple sclerosis: a novel semiautomated segmentation technique.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES The authors designed a segmentation technique that requires only minimal operator input at the initial and final supervision stages of segmentation and has computer-driven segmentation as the primary determinant of lesion boundaries. The technique was applied to compute total T2-hyperintense lesion volumes in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). A semi-automated segmentation technique is presented and shown to have a test-retest reliability of <5%. MATERIALS AND METHODS The method used a single segmented section with MS lesions. A probabilistic neural net performed segmentation into four tissue classes after supervised training. This reference section was deconstructed into the entire set of possible 4 x 4-pixel subregions, which was used to segment all-brain sections in steps of 4 x 4-pixel, adjacent image blocks. Intra- and interimage variabilities were tested by using 3-mm-thick, T2-weighted, dual-echo, spin-echo MR images from five patients, each of whom was imaged twice on the same day. Five different reference sections and three temporally separated. training sessions involving the same reference section were used to test the segmentation technique. RESULTS The coefficient of variation ranged from 0.013 to 0.068 (mean +/- standard deviation, 0.037 +/- 0.039) for results from five different reference sections for each brain and from 0.007 to 0.037 (mean, 0.027 +/- 0.021) for brains segmented with the same reference section on three temporally separated occasions. Test-retest (intra-imaging) reliability did not exceed 5% (except for a small lesion load of 1 cm3 in one patient). Interimaging differences were approximately 10%. CONCLUSION The segmentation technique yielded intra-imaging variabilities (2%-3%, except for very small MS lesion loads) that compare favorably with previously published results. New repositioning techniques that minimize imaging-repeat imaging variability could make this approach attractive for resolving MS lesion detection problems.

[1]  A. Fenster,et al.  The variability of manual and computer assisted quantification of multiple sclerosis lesion volumes. , 1996, Medical physics.

[2]  H. McFarland,et al.  Outcomes assessment in multiple sclerosis clinical trials: a critical analysis , 1995, Multiple sclerosis.

[3]  Simon Jh Magnetic resonance imaging of multiple sclerosis lesions. Measuring outcome in treatment trials. , 1996 .

[4]  Alan C. Evans,et al.  The Role of MRI in clinical trials of multiple sclerosis: Comparison of image processing techniques , 1997, Annals of neurology.

[5]  D. Paty,et al.  Interferon beta‐1b is effective in relapsing‐remitting multiple sclerosis , 1993, Neurology.

[6]  S. Webb,et al.  A reproducible repositioning method for serial magnetic resonance imaging studies of the brain in treatment trials for multiple sclerosis , 1997, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[7]  C. Granger,et al.  Intramuscular interferon beta‐1a for disease progression in relapsing multiple sclerosis , 1996, Annals of neurology.

[8]  M. Horsfield,et al.  Intra- and inter-observer agreement of brain MRI lesion volume measurements in multiple sclerosis. A comparison of techniques. , 1995, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[9]  J A Frank,et al.  Correspondence of closest gradient Voxels—A robust registration algorithm , 1997, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[10]  R. Kikinis,et al.  Routine quantitative analysis of brain and cerebrospinal fluid spaces with MR imaging , 1992, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[11]  F. Barkhof,et al.  Guidelines for the use of magnetic resonance techniques in monitoring the treatment of multiple sclerosis , 1996, Annals of neurology.

[12]  M. Horsfield,et al.  Quantitative assessment of MRI lesion load in monitoring the evolution of multiple sclerosis. , 1995, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[13]  G. Barker,et al.  Quantification of MRI lesion load in multiple sclerosis: a comparison of three computer-assisted techniques. , 1996, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[14]  P. Narayana,et al.  Effect of Radio Frequency Inhomogeneity Correction on the Reproducibility of Intra‐Cranial Volumes Using MR Image Data , 1995, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[15]  F. Barkhof,et al.  Correlations between monthly enhanced MRI Lesion rate and changes in T2 Lesion volume in multiple sclerosis , 1998, Annals of neurology.

[16]  Marco Rovaris,et al.  The effect of repositioning on brain MRI lesion load assessment in multiple sclerosis: reliability of subjective quality criteria , 1998, Journal of Neurology.

[17]  J. Kurtzke Rating neurologic impairment in multiple sclerosis , 1983, Neurology.

[18]  J H Simon,et al.  Computerized method of lesion volume quantitation in multiple sclerosis: error of serial studies. , 1997, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[19]  A. Fenster,et al.  Computer‐assisted identification and quantification of multiple sclerosis lesions in MR imaging volumes in the brain , 1994, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[20]  K. Lim,et al.  Segmentation of MR Brain Images into Cerebrospinal Fluid Spaces, White and Gray Matter , 1989, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[21]  Supun Samarasekera,et al.  Fuzzy Connectedness and Object Definition: Theory, Algorithms, and Applications in Image Segmentation , 1996, CVGIP Graph. Model. Image Process..

[22]  P. Narayana,et al.  Automatic removal of extrameningeal tissues from MR images of human brain , 1996, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[23]  L O Hall,et al.  Review of MR image segmentation techniques using pattern recognition. , 1993, Medical physics.

[24]  J A Frank,et al.  Guidelines for using quantitative measures of brain magnetic resonance imaging abnormalities in monitoring the treatment of multiple sclerosis , 1998, Annals of neurology.

[25]  F. Barkhof,et al.  Interscanner variation in brain MRI lesion load measurements in MS: Implications for clinical trials , 1997, Neurology.

[26]  G. Comi,et al.  Resolution‐dependent estimates of lesion volumes in magnetic resonance imaging studies of the brain in multiple sclerosis , 1995, Annals of neurology.

[27]  P Dastidar,et al.  Applicability of semi-automatic segmentation for volumetric analysis of brain lesions. , 1998, Journal of medical engineering & technology.

[28]  Jeanelle Sheeder,et al.  Magnetic resonance studies of intramuscular interferon β–1a for relapsing multiple sclerosis , 1998 .

[29]  J H Simon,et al.  Quantitation of grey matter, white matter, and cerebrospinal fluid from spin-echo magnetic resonance images using an artificial neural network technique. , 1994, Medical physics.

[30]  Roger D. Boss,et al.  Archetype classification in an iterated transformation image compression algorithm , 1995 .

[31]  U Raff,et al.  Quantitation of T2 lesion load in multiple sclerosis with magnetic resonance imaging: a pilot study of a probabilistic neural network approach. , 1997, Academic radiology.

[32]  Lyman P. Hurd,et al.  Fractal image compression , 1993 .

[33]  L M Fletcher,et al.  A multispectral analysis of brain tissues , 1993, Magnetic resonance in medicine.