Evaluating the effect of multiple sclerosis lesions on automatic brain structure segmentation

In recent years, many automatic brain structure segmentation methods have been proposed. However, these methods are commonly tested with non-lesioned brains and the effect of lesions on their performance has not been evaluated. Here, we analyze the effect of multiple sclerosis (MS) lesions on three well-known automatic brain structure segmentation methods, namely, FreeSurfer, FIRST and multi-atlas fused by majority voting, which use learning-based, deformable and atlas-based strategies, respectively. To perform a quantitative analysis, 100 synthetic images of MS patients with a total of 2174 lesions are simulated on two public databases with available brain structure ground truth information (IBSR18 and MICCAI’12). The Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) differences and the volume differences between the healthy and the simulated images are calculated for the subcortical structures and the brainstem. We observe that the three strategies are affected when lesions are present. However, the effects of the lesions do not follow the same pattern; the lesions either make the segmentation method underperform or surprisingly augment the segmentation accuracy. The obtained results show that FreeSurfer is the method most affected by the presence of lesions, with DSC differences (generated − healthy) ranging from − 0.11 ± 0.54 to 9.65 ± 9.87, whereas FIRST tends to be the most robust method when lesions are present (− 2.40 ± 5.54 to 0.44 ± 0.94). Lesion location is not important for global strategies such as FreeSurfer or majority voting, where structure segmentation is affected wherever the lesions exist. On the other hand, FIRST is more affected when the lesions are overlaid or close to the structure of analysis. The most affected structure by the presence of lesions is the nucleus accumbens (from − 1.12 ± 2.53 to 1.32 ± 4.00 for the left hemisphere and from − 2.40 ± 5.54 to 9.65 ± 9.87 for the right hemisphere), whereas the structures that show less variation include the thalamus (from 0.03 ± 0.35 to 0.74 ± 0.89 and from − 0.48 ± 1.08 to − 0.04 ± 0.22) and the brainstem (from − 0.20 ± 0.38 to 1.03 ± 1.31). The three segmentation approaches are affected by the presence of MS lesions, which demonstrates that there exists a problem in the automatic segmentation methods of the deep gray matter (DGM) structures that has to be taken into account when using them as a tool to measure the disease progression.

[1]  Mark Jenkinson,et al.  The effect of hypointense white matter lesions on automated gray matter segmentation in multiple sclerosis , 2012, Human brain mapping.

[2]  Jayaram K. Udupa,et al.  New variants of a method of MRI scale standardization , 2000, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[3]  Stephen M. Smith,et al.  A Bayesian model of shape and appearance for subcortical brain segmentation , 2011, NeuroImage.

[4]  Aamish Z Kazi,et al.  MRI evaluation of pathologies affecting the corpus callosum: A pictorial essay , 2013, Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging.

[5]  Richard Nicholas,et al.  Analysis of ageing-associated grey matter volume in patients with multiple sclerosis shows excess atrophy in subcortical regions , 2016, NeuroImage: Clinical.

[6]  J. Ranjeva,et al.  Atrophy mainly affects the limbic system and the deep grey matter at the first stage of multiple sclerosis , 2010, Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry.

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

[8]  Max A. Viergever,et al.  elastix: A Toolbox for Intensity-Based Medical Image Registration , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[9]  Daniel Rueckert,et al.  Automatic anatomical brain MRI segmentation combining label propagation and decision fusion , 2006, NeuroImage.

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

[11]  Mert R. Sabuncu,et al.  A Generative Model for Probabilistic Label Fusion of Multimodal Data , 2012, MBIA.

[12]  M. Battaglini,et al.  Evaluating and reducing the impact of white matter lesions on brain volume measurements , 2012, Human brain mapping.

[13]  A. Oliver,et al.  A white matter lesion-filling approach to improve brain tissue volume measurements , 2014, NeuroImage: Clinical.

[14]  Vladimir S Fonov,et al.  Jacobian integration method increases the statistical power to measure gray matter atrophy in multiple sclerosis , 2013, NeuroImage: Clinical.

[15]  Stephen M. Smith,et al.  Segmentation of brain MR images through a hidden Markov random field model and the expectation-maximization algorithm , 2001, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[16]  A. Oliver,et al.  Evaluating the Effects of White Matter Multiple Sclerosis Lesions on the Volume Estimation of 6 Brain Tissue Segmentation Methods , 2015, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[17]  C R G Guttmann,et al.  Thalamic atrophy and cognition in multiple sclerosis , 2007, Neurology.

[18]  Daniel Rueckert,et al.  An evaluation of four automatic methods of segmenting the subcortical structures in the brain , 2009, NeuroImage.

[19]  Howard Aizenstein,et al.  Brainstem morphological changes in Alzheimer’s disease , 2015, Neuroreport.

[20]  M. Dwyer,et al.  Subcortical Atrophy Is Associated with Cognitive Impairment in Mild Parkinson Disease: A Combined Investigation of Volumetric Changes, Cortical Thickness, and Vertex-Based Shape Analysis , 2014, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[21]  Arnau Oliver,et al.  A review on brain structures segmentation in magnetic resonance imaging , 2016, Artif. Intell. Medicine.

[22]  F. Barkhof,et al.  Accurate GM atrophy quantification in MS using lesion-filling with co-registered 2D lesion masks☆ , 2014, NeuroImage: Clinical.

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

[24]  Bruce Fischl,et al.  FreeSurfer , 2012, NeuroImage.

[25]  M. Calabrese,et al.  The predictive value of gray matter atrophy in clinically isolated syndromes , 2011, Neurology.

[26]  Linda Douw,et al.  Subcortical atrophy and cognition , 2012, Neurology.

[27]  Kunio Nakamura,et al.  Segmentation of brain magnetic resonance images for measurement of gray matter atrophy in multiple sclerosis patients , 2009, NeuroImage.

[28]  Turi O. Dalaker,et al.  Brain atrophy and disability progression in multiple sclerosis patients: a 10-year follow-up study , 2014, Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry.

[29]  Paul A. Yushkevich,et al.  Multi-atlas segmentation with joint label fusion and corrective learning—an open source implementation , 2013, Front. Neuroinform..

[30]  David H. Miller,et al.  Reducing the impact of white matter lesions on automated measures of brain gray and white matter volumes , 2010, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[31]  Simon K. Warfield,et al.  Learning Likelihoods for Labeling (L3): A General Multi-Classifier Segmentation Algorithm , 2011, MICCAI.

[32]  M. Dwyer,et al.  Subcortical and Cortical Gray Matter Atrophy in a Large Sample of Patients with Clinically Isolated Syndrome and Early Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis , 2012, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[33]  Paul A. Yushkevich,et al.  Multi-Atlas Segmentation with Joint Label Fusion , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[34]  P. Hluštík,et al.  Thalamic atrophy and cognitive impairment in clinically isolated syndrome and multiple sclerosis , 2014, Journal of the Neurological Sciences.

[35]  Tracy R. Melzer,et al.  Deep grey matter MRI abnormalities and cognitive function in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis , 2015, Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging.