Iranian Journal of Medical Physics

Iranian Journal of Medical Physics

Evaluation and Comparison of Automatic Brain Segmentation Methods Based On the Gold Standard Method

Document Type : Original Paper

Authors
Seyed Amir Zamanpour 1
Zohreh Ganji 1
Bahareh Bigham 1
Fariba Zemorshidi 2
Hoda Zare 3
1 Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
2 Department of Neurology, Ghaem Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
3 Mashhad University of Medical Sciences
10.22038/ijmp.2022.66025.2134
Abstract
Introduction: Accurate segmentation of brain tissue in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an important step in the analysis of brain images. There are automated methods used to segmentation the brain and minimize the disadvantages of manual segmentation, including time consuming and misinterpretations. These procedures usually involve a combination of skull removal, bias field correction, and segmentation. Therefore, segmented tissue quality assessment segmentation of gray matter (GM), white matter (WM), and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is required for the analysis of neuroimages.
Material and Methods: This paper presents the performance evaluation of three automatic methods brain segmentation, fluid and white matter suppression [FSL, Freesurfer (FreeSurfer is an open source package for the analysis and visualization of structural, functional, and diffusion neuroimaging data from cross-sectional and longitudinal studies) and SPM12 (Statistical Parametric Mapping)]. Segmentation with SPM12 was performed on three tissue probability maps: i) threshold 0.5, ii) threshold 0.7 and iii) threshold 0.9. In order to compare and evaluate the automatic methods, the reference standard method, i.e., manual segmentation, was performed by three radiologists.
Results: Comparison of GM, WM and CSF segmentation in MR images was performed using similarities between manual and automatic segmentation. The similarity between the segmented tissues was calculated using diagnostic criteria.
Conclusion: Several studies have examined the classification of GM, WM, and CSF using software packages. In these studies, different results have been obtained depending on the type of method and images used and the type of segmented tissues. In this study, the evaluation of the segmentation of these packages with reference standard method is performed. The results can help users in selecting an appropriate segmentation tool for neuroimages analysis.
Keywords
MRI
Brain
Segmentation
FSL
Freesurfer
SPM
Subjects
  1. Despotović I, Goossens B, Philips W. MRI segmentation of the human brain: challenges, methods, and applications. Computational and mathematical methods in medicine. 2015 Oct;2015.
  2. Pal NR, Pal SK. A review on image segmentation techniques. Pattern recognition. 1993 Sep 1;26(9):1277-94.
  3. Chan TF, Vese LA. Active contours without edges. IEEE Transactions on image processing. 2001 Feb;10(2):266-77.
  4. Boykov Y, Funka-Lea G. Graph cuts and efficient ND image segmentation. International journal of computer vision. 2006 Nov;70(2):109-31.
  5. Unnikrishnan R, Pantofaru C, Hebert M. Toward objective evaluation of image segmentation algorithms. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence. 2007 Apr 23;29(6):929-44.
  6. Cai W, Chen S, Zhang D. Fast and robust fuzzy c-means clustering algorithms incorporating local information for image segmentation. Pattern recognition. 2007 Mar 1;40(3):825-38.
  7. Prastawa M. An MRI segmentation framework for brains with anatomical deviations. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; 2007.
  8. Shi F, Shen D, Yap PT, Fan Y, Cheng JZ, An H, et al. CENTS: cortical enhanced neonatal tissue segmentation. Human brain mapping. 2011 Mar;32(3):382-96.
  9. Wang L, Shi F, Li G, Gao Y, Lin W, Gilmore JH, Shen D. Segmentation of neonatal brain MR images using patch-driven level sets. NeuroImage. 2014 Jan 1;84:141-58.
  10. Weisenfeld NI, Warfield SK. Automatic segmentation of newborn brain MRI. Neuroimage. 2009 Aug 15;47(2):564-72.
  11. Moreno JC, Prasath VS, Proenca H, Palaniappan K. Fast and globally convex multiphase active contours for brain MRI segmentation. Computer Vision and Image Understanding. 2014 Aug 1;125:237-50.
  12. Lenchik L, Heacock L, Weaver AA, Boutin RD, Cook TS, Itri J, et al. Automated segmentation of tissues using CT and MRI: a systematic review. Academic radiology. 2019 Dec 1;26(12):1695-706.
  13. Katyal R, Paneri S, Kuse M. Gaussian intensity model with neighborhood cues for fluid-tissue categorization of multisequence MR brain images. Proceedings of the MICCAI Grand Challenge on MR Brain Image Segmentation (MRBrainS’13). 2013 Sep.
  14. Rajchl M, Baxter JS, McLeod AJ, Yuan J, Qiu W, Peters TM, et al. ASeTs: MAP-based brain tissue segmentation using manifold learning and hierarchical max-flow regularization. Proceedings of the MICCAI Grand Challenge on MR Brain Image Segmentation (MRBrainS’13). 2013 Sep;375.
  15. Mahmood Q, Alipoor M, Chodorowski A, Mehnert A, Persson M. Multimodal MR brain segmentation using Bayesian-based adaptive mean-shift (BAMS). InProceedings of the MICCAI Workshops—The MICCAI Grand Challenge on MR Brain Image Segmentation (MRBrainS’13). 2013 Sep.
  16. Sarikaya D, Zhao L, Corso JJ. Multi-atlas brain MRI segmentation with multiway cut. InProceedings of the MICCAI Workshops—The MICCAI Grand Challenge on MR Brain Image Segmentation (MRBrainS’13) 2013 Sep.
  17. Wang C, Smedby Ö. Fully automatic brain segmentation using model-guided level sets and skeleton-based models. MIDAS J. 2013 Sep;10.
  18. van Opbroek A, van der Lijn F, de Bruijne M. Automated brain-tissue segmentation by multi-feature SVM classification. InProceedings of the MICCAI Workshops—The MICCAI Grand Challenge on MR Brain Image Segmentation (MRBrainS’13). 2013 Sep.
  19. Moeskops P, Viergever MA, Benders MJ, Išgum I. Evaluation of an automatic brain segmentation method developed for neonates on adult MR brain images. InMedical Imaging 2015: Image Processing. 2015 Mar 20; 9413:304-9.
  20. Wang C, Wang Q, Smedby Ö. Automatic heart and vessel segmentation using random forests and a local phase guided level set method. InReconstruction, Segmentation, and Analysis of Medical Images. 2016 Oct 17: 159-64.
  21. Chen H, Dou Q, Yu L, Qin J, Heng PA. VoxResNet: Deep voxelwise residual networks for brain segmentation from 3D MR images. NeuroImage. 2018 Apr 15;170:446-55.
  22. Çiçek Ö, Abdulkadir A, Lienkamp SS, Brox T, Ronneberger O. 3D U-Net: learning dense volumetric segmentation from sparse annotation. InInternational conference on medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention. 2016 Oct 17; 424-32.
  23. Andermatt S, Pezold S, Cattin P. Multi-dimensional gated recurrent units for the segmentation of biomedical 3D-data. InDeep learning and data labeling for medical applications. 2016 Oct 21;142-51.
  24. Stollenga MF, Byeon W, Liwicki M, Schmidhuber J. Parallel multi-dimensional LSTM, with application to fast biomedical volumetric image segmentation. Advances in neural information processing systems. 2015;28.
  25. Lenchik L, Heacock L, Weaver AA, Boutin RD, Cook TS, Itri J, et al. Automated segmentation of tissues using CT and MRI: a systematic review. Academic radiology. 2019 Dec 1;26(12):1695-706.
  26. Fischl B, Salat DH, Busa E, Albert M, Dieterich M, Haselgrove C, et al. Whole brain segmentation: automated labeling of neuroanatomical structures in the human brain. Neuron. 2002 Jan 31;33(3):341-55.
  27. Jenkinson M, Beckmann CF, Behrens TE, Woolrich MW, Smith SM. Fsl. Neuroimage. 2012 Aug 15;62(2):782-90.
  28. Smith SM, Jenkinson M, Woolrich MW, Beckmann CF, Behrens TE, Johansen-Berg H, et al. Advances in functional and structural MR image analysis and implementation as FSL. Neuroimage. 2004 Jan 1;23:S208-19.
  29. Zhang Y, Brady JM, Smith SM. An hmrf-em algorithm for partial volume segmentation of brain mri fmrib technical report tr01yz1. Technical Report, Oxford Centre for Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Brain; 2001 Jan 24.
  30. Fischl B. FreeSurfer. Neuroimage. 2012 Aug 15;62(2):774-81.
  31. Ashburner J, Friston K, Holmes A, Poline JB, Rouquette S, Worsley K. Statistical parametric mapping, SPM’ The Welcome Department of Cognitive Neurology. Institute of Neurology, University College London. 1999.
  32. The Image and Data Archive (IDA) is a secure online resource for archiving, exploring and sharing neuroscience data. Available from: https://ida.loni.usc.edu/home/projectPage.jsp?project=ADNI
  33. Yushkevich P. ITK-SNaP integration, NLM insight. Available from: http://www.itksnap.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php.
  34. FSL - FslWiki [Internet]. fsl.fmrib.ox.ac.uk. Available from: https://fsl.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/fsl/fslwiki
  35. Dale AM. Optimal experimental design for event‐related fMRI. Human brain mapping. 1999;8(2‐3):109-14.
  36. Dale AM, Fischl B, Sereno MI. Cortical surface-based analysis: I. Segmentation and surface reconstruction. Neuroimage. 1999 Feb 1;9(2):179-94.
  37. Fischl B, Dale AM. Measuring the thickness of the human cerebral cortex from magnetic resonance images. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2000 Sep 26;97(20):11050-5.
  38. FreeSurfer [Internet]. Harvard.edu. 2013. Available from: https://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/
  39. SPM12 Software - Statistical Parametric Mapping [Internet]. www.fil.ion.ucl.ac.uk. Available from: https://www.fil.ion.ucl.ac.uk/spm/software/spm12/
  40. Kazemi K, Noorizadeh N. Quantitative comparison of SPM, FSL, and brainsuite for brain MR image segmentation. Journal of biomedical physics & engineering. 2014 Mar;4(1):13.
  41. Ashburner J, Barnes G, Chen CC, Daunizeau J, Flandin G, Friston K, et al. SPM12 manual. Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, London, UK. 2014 Jun 26;2464.
  42. Dice LR. Measures of the amount of ecologic association between species. Ecology. 1945 Jul;26(3):297-302.
  43. Jaccard P. The distribution of the flora in the alpine zone. 1. New phytologist. 1912 Feb;11(2):37-50.
  44. Moore, C., Bell, D. Dice similarity coefficient. Reference article, Radiopaedia.org. 2022. https://doi.org/10.53347/rID-75056
  45. Moore, C. Jaccard Index. Reference article, Radiopaedia.org. Available from: https://radiopaedia.org/articles/jaccard-index.
  46. Parikh R, Mathai A, Parikh S et-al. Understanding and using sensitivity, specificity and predictive values. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2008;56 (1): 45-50.
  47. Accuracy IS. of measurement methods and results—part 1: General principles and definitions. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland. 1994.
  48. Metz, CE (October 1978). "Basic principles of ROC analysis" (PDF). Semin Nucl Med. 8 (4): 283– doi:10.1016/s0001-2998(78)80014-2. PMID 112681
  49. Kasiri K, Javad DM, Kazemi K, Sadegh HM, Kafshgari S. Comparison evaluation of three brain MRI segmentation methods in software tools. In2010 17th Iranian Conference of Biomedical Engineering (ICBME). 2010 Nov 3; 1-4.
  50. Palumbo L, Bosco P, Fantacci ME, Ferrari E, Oliva P, Spera G, et al. Evaluation of the intra-and inter-method agreement of brain MRI segmentation software packages: A comparison between SPM12 and FreeSurfer v6. 0. Physica Medica. 2019 Aug 1;64:261-72.

 

 

 

 

 

Iranian Journal of Medical Physics
Volume 20, Issue 4
July and August 2023
Pages 233-245

  • Receive Date 11 June 2022
  • Revise Date 17 July 2022
  • Accept Date 17 July 2022