Search

PURPOSE:During resections of brain tumors, neurosurgeons have to weigh the risk between residual tumor and damage to brain functions. Different perspectives on these risks result in practice variation. We present statistical methods to localize differences in extent of resection between institutions which should enable to reveal brain regions affected by such practice variation. METHODS:Synthetic data were generated by simulating spheres for brain, tumors, resection cavities, and an effect region in which a likelihood of surgical avoidance could be varied between institutions. Three statistical methods were investigated: a non-parametric permutation based approach, Fisher's exact test, and a full Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) model. For all three methods the false discovery rate (FDR) was determined as a function of the cut-off value for the q-value or the highest density interval, and receiver operating characteristic and precision recall curves were created. Sensitivity to variations in the parameters of the synthetic model were investigated. Finally, all these methods were applied to retrospectively collected data of 77 brain tumor resections in two academic hospitals. RESULTS:Fisher's method provided an accurate estimation of observed FDR in the synthetic data, whereas the permutation approach was too liberal and underestimated FDR. AUC values were similar for Fisher and Bayes methods, and superior to the permutation approach. Fisher's method deteriorated and became too liberal for reduced tumor size, a smaller size of the effect region, a lower overall extent of resection, fewer patients per cohort, and a smaller discrepancy in surgical avoidance probabilities between the different surgical practices. In the retrospective patient data, all three methods identified a similar effect region, with lower estimated FDR in Fisher's method than using the permutation method. CONCLUSIONS:Differences in surgical practice may be detected using voxel statistics. Fisher's test provides a fast method to localize differences but could underestimate true FDR. Bayesian MCMC is more flexible and easily extendable, and leads to similar results, but at increased computational cost.

ObjectiveThe objective is to present a proof-of-concept of a semi-automatic method to reduce hippocampus segmentation time on magnetic resonance images (MRI).Materials and methodsFAst Segmentation Through SURface Fairing (FASTSURF) is based on a surface fairing technique which reconstructs the hippocampus from sparse delineations. To validate FASTSURF, simulations were performed in which sparse delineations extracted from full manual segmentations served as input. On three different datasets with different diagnostic groups, FASTSURF hippocampi were compared to the original segmentations using Jaccard overlap indices and percentage volume differences (PVD). In one data set for which back-to-back scans were available, unbiased estimates of overlap and PVD were obtained. Using longitudinal scans, we compared hippocampal atrophy rates measured by manual, FASTSURF and two automatic segmentations (FreeSurfer and FSL-FIRST).ResultsWith only seven input contours, FASTSURF yielded mean Jaccard indices ranging from 72(±4.3)% to 83(±2.6)% and PVDs ranging from 0.02(±2.40)% to 3.2(±3.40)% across the three datasets. Slightly poorer results were obtained for the unbiased analysis, but the performance was still considerably better than both tested automatic methods with only five contours.ConclusionsFASTSURF segmentations have high accuracy and require only a fraction of the delineation effort of fully manual segmentation. Atrophy rate quantification based on completely manual segmentation is well reproduced by FASTSURF. Therefore, FASTSURF is a promising tool to be implemented in clinical workflow, provided a future prospective validation confirms our findings.

PURPOSE:Precise and reproducible hippocampus outlining is important to quantify hippocampal atrophy caused by neurodegenerative diseases and to spare the hippocampus in whole brain radiation therapy when performing prophylactic cranial irradiation or treating brain metastases. This study aimed to quantify systematic differences between methods by comparing regional volume and outline reproducibility of manual, FSL-FIRST and FreeSurfer hippocampus segmentations. MATERIALS AND METHODS:This study used a dataset from ADNI (Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative), including 20 healthy controls, 40 patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and 20 patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD). For each subject back-to-back (BTB) T1-weighted 3D MPRAGE images were acquired at time-point baseline (BL) and 12 months later (M12). Hippocampi segmentations of all methods were converted into triangulated meshes, regional volumes were extracted and regional Jaccard indices were computed between the hippocampi meshes of paired BTB scans to evaluate reproducibility. Regional volumes and Jaccard indices were modelled as a function of group (G), method (M), hemisphere (H), time-point (T), region (R) and interactions. RESULTS:For the volume data the model selection procedure yielded the following significant main effects G, M, H, T and R and interaction effects G-R and M-R. The same model was found for the BTB scans. For all methods volumes reduces with the severity of disease. Significant fixed effects for the regional Jaccard index data were M, R and the interaction M-R. For all methods the middle region was most reproducible, independent of diagnostic group. FSL-FIRST was most and FreeSurfer least reproducible. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION:A novel method to perform detailed analysis of subtle differences in hippocampus segmentation is proposed. The method showed that hippocampal segmentation reproducibility was best for FSL-FIRST and worst for Freesurfer. We also found systematic regional differences in hippocampal segmentation between different methods reinforcing the need of adopting harmonized protocols.