Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Sep 1:14:1221892.
doi: 10.3389/fneur.2023.1221892. eCollection 2023.

Development and validation of a deep learning-based automatic segmentation model for assessing intracranial volume: comparison with NeuroQuant, FreeSurfer, and SynthSeg

Affiliations

Development and validation of a deep learning-based automatic segmentation model for assessing intracranial volume: comparison with NeuroQuant, FreeSurfer, and SynthSeg

Pae Sun Suh et al. Front Neurol. .

Erratum in

Abstract

Background and purpose: To develop and validate a deep learning-based automatic segmentation model for assessing intracranial volume (ICV) and to compare the accuracy determined by NeuroQuant (NQ), FreeSurfer (FS), and SynthSeg.

Materials and methods: This retrospective study included 60 subjects [30 Alzheimer's disease (AD), 21 mild cognitive impairment (MCI), 9 cognitively normal (CN)] from a single tertiary hospital for the training and validation group (50:10). The test group included 40 subjects (20 AD, 10 MCI, 10 CN) from the ADNI dataset. We propose a robust ICV segmentation model based on the foundational 2D UNet architecture trained with four types of input images (both single and multimodality using scaled or unscaled T1-weighted and T2-FLAIR MR images). To compare with our model, NQ, FS, and SynthSeg were also utilized in the test group. We evaluated the model performance by measuring the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and average volume difference.

Results: The single-modality model trained with scaled T1-weighted images showed excellent performance with a DSC of 0.989 ± 0.002 and an average volume difference of 0.46% ± 0.38%. Our multimodality model trained with both unscaled T1-weighted and T2-FLAIR images showed similar performance with a DSC of 0.988 ± 0.002 and an average volume difference of 0.47% ± 0.35%. The overall average volume difference with our model showed relatively higher accuracy than NQ (2.15% ± 1.72%), FS (3.69% ± 2.93%), and SynthSeg (1.88% ± 1.18%). Furthermore, our model outperformed the three others in each subgroup of patients with AD, MCI, and CN subjects.

Conclusion: Our deep learning-based automatic ICV segmentation model showed excellent performance for the automatic evaluation of ICV.

Keywords: artificial intelligence; brain; deep learning; intracranial volume segmentation; neurodegenerative disease.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Patient flow diagram of this retrospective cohort. AD, Alzheimer’s disease; MCI, Mild cognitive impairment; CN, Cognitively normal; ADNI, Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Model architecture of the proposed deep learning-based ICV segmentation model. The model exploits the basic 2D UNet architecture, which consists of five encoder and four decoder layers. Conv 3 × 3, convolutional layer with a kernel size of 3 × 3; BatchNorm, batch normalization; ReLU, rectified linear unit; MaxPool, maxpooling.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Scatterplot of the correlation between the manually segmented ICV from the T1-weighted images in the test set and automated segmented ICV determined by our proposed model trained with scaled T1-weighted images only (A), unscaled both T1-weighted and T2-FLAIR images (B), FreeSurfer (C), NeuroQuant (D), and SynthSeg (E).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Our multimodality deep learning model shows robustness in various protocols and patient ages. The multimodal model (right) shows advantages in enhanced T1-weighted images around hyperintense enhanced vessels (A) and images from a young patient without atrophy images (B) compared with the single-modality model (middle).

References

    1. Yamasaki T, Tobimatsu S. Driving ability in Alzheimer disease spectrum: neural basis, assessment, and potential use of optic flow event-related potentials. Front Neurol. (2018) 9:750. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2018.00750, PMID: - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brewer JB, Magda S, Airriess C, Smith ME. Fully-automated quantification of regional brain volumes for improved detection of focal atrophy in Alzheimer disease. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. (2009) 30:578–80. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A1402, PMID: - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Suh CH, Shim WH, Kim SJ, Roh JH, Lee JH, Kim MJ, et al. . Development and validation of a deep learning-based automatic brain segmentation and classification algorithm for Alzheimer disease using 3D T1-weighted volumetric images. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. (2020) 41:2227–34. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A6848, PMID: - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hansen TI, Brezova V, Eikenes L, Haberg A, Vangberg TR. How does the accuracy of intracranial volume measurements affect normalized brain volumes? Sample size estimates based on 966 subjects from the HUNT MRI cohort. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. (2015) 36:1450–6. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A4299, PMID: - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Shattuck DW, Sandor-Leahy SR, Schaper KA, Rottenberg DA, Leahy RM. Magnetic resonance image tissue classification using a partial volume model. Neuroimage. (2001) 13:856–76. doi: 10.1006/nimg.2000.0730 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources