Multi-atlas skull-stripping.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES We present a new method for automatic brain extraction on structural magnetic resonance images, based on a multi-atlas registration framework. MATERIALS AND METHODS Our method addresses fundamental challenges of multi-atlas approaches. To overcome the difficulties arising from the variability of imaging characteristics between studies, we propose a study-specific template selection strategy, by which we select a set of templates that best represent the anatomical variations within the data set. Against the difficulties of registering brain images with skull, we use a particularly adapted registration algorithm that is more robust to large variations between images, as it adaptively aligns different regions of the two images based not only on their similarity but also on the reliability of the matching between images. Finally, a spatially adaptive weighted voting strategy, which uses the ranking of Jacobian determinant values to measure the local similarity between the template and the target images, is applied for combining coregistered template masks. RESULTS The method is validated on three different public data sets and obtained a higher accuracy than recent state-of-the-art brain extraction methods. Also, the proposed method is successfully applied on several recent imaging studies, each containing thousands of magnetic resonance images, thus reducing the manual correction time significantly. CONCLUSIONS The new method, available as a stand-alone software package for public use, provides a robust and accurate brain extraction tool applicable for both clinical use and large population studies.

[1]  Alex M. Andrew,et al.  Level Set Methods and Fast Marching Methods: Evolving Interfaces in Computational Geometry, Fluid Mechanics, Computer Vision, and Materials Science (2nd edition) , 2000 .

[2]  Sébastien Ourselin,et al.  Automated brain extraction using Multi-Atlas Propagation and Segmentation (MAPS) , 2011, 2011 IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging: From Nano to Macro.

[3]  Stephen M Smith,et al.  Fast robust automated brain extraction , 2002, Human brain mapping.

[4]  Carlos Ortiz-de-Solorzano,et al.  Combination Strategies in Multi-Atlas Image Segmentation: Application to Brain MR Data , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[5]  Max A. Viergever,et al.  Multi-Atlas-Based Segmentation With Local Decision Fusion—Application to Cardiac and Aortic Segmentation in CT Scans , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[6]  Dinggang Shen,et al.  Robust Deformable-Surface-Based Skull-Stripping for Large-Scale Studies , 2011, MICCAI.

[7]  A. Traboulsee,et al.  MRI Brain Extraction with Combined Expectation Maximization and Geodesic Active Contours , 2006, 2006 IEEE International Symposium on Signal Processing and Information Technology.

[8]  R. Leahy,et al.  Magnetic Resonance Image Tissue Classification Using a Partial Volume Model , 2001, NeuroImage.

[9]  Nick C Fox,et al.  The Alzheimer's disease neuroimaging initiative (ADNI): MRI methods , 2008, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[10]  William M. Wells,et al.  Simultaneous truth and performance level estimation (STAPLE): an algorithm for the validation of image segmentation , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[11]  Henry Rusinek,et al.  Fully automatic segmentation of the brain from T1‐weighted MRI using Bridge Burner algorithm , 2008, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[12]  Stephen M. Smith,et al.  Enhanced brain extraction improves the accuracy of brain atrophy estimation , 2008, NeuroImage.

[13]  Nikos Paragios,et al.  DRAMMS: Deformable Registration via Attribute Matching and Mutual-Saliency Weighting , 2009, IPMI.

[14]  Robert T. Schultz,et al.  Segmentation and Measurement of the Cortex from 3D MR Images , 1998, MICCAI.

[15]  Paul M. Thompson,et al.  Robust Brain Extraction Across Datasets and Comparison With Publicly Available Methods , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[16]  James A. Sethian,et al.  Level Set Methods and Fast Marching Methods: Evolving Interfaces in Computational Geometry, Fluid , 2012 .

[17]  Arno Klein,et al.  Evaluation of 14 nonlinear deformation algorithms applied to human brain MRI registration , 2009, NeuroImage.

[18]  Tom Vercauteren,et al.  Diffeomorphic demons: Efficient non-parametric image registration , 2009, NeuroImage.

[19]  D. Louis Collins,et al.  BEaST: Brain extraction based on nonlocal segmentation technique , 2012, NeuroImage.

[20]  Michael W. L. Chee,et al.  Skull stripping using graph cuts , 2010, NeuroImage.

[21]  Brian B. Avants,et al.  Symmetric diffeomorphic image registration with cross-correlation: Evaluating automated labeling of elderly and neurodegenerative brain , 2008, Medical Image Anal..

[22]  Daniel P. Huttenlocher,et al.  Comparing Images Using the Hausdorff Distance , 1993, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[23]  Mert R. Sabuncu,et al.  A Generative Model for Image Segmentation Based on Label Fusion , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[24]  C. Jack,et al.  Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative , 2008 .

[25]  Kwanghoon Sohn,et al.  Automated cerebrum segmentation from three-dimensional sagittal brain MR images , 2002, Comput. Biol. Medicine.

[26]  L. R. Dice Measures of the Amount of Ecologic Association Between Species , 1945 .

[27]  Aaron Carass,et al.  Simple paradigm for extra-cerebral tissue removal: Algorithm and analysis , 2011, NeuroImage.