Cotter D, Miszkiel K, Al-Sarraj S, Wilkinson I D, Paley M, Harrison M J, Hall-Craggs M A, Everall I P
Department of Neuropathology, Institute of Psychiatry, London, UK.
Neuroradiology. 1999 Jul;41(7):493-6. doi: 10.1007/s002340050789.
We compared two methods of estimating the volume of 10 formalin-fixed brains using MRI. MRI was performed and total brain volume was then assessed using two distinct techniques: a stereological point-counting technique based on the Cavalieri principle, and an edge-tracing technique. The total brain volumes obtained using these two techniques were similar and correlated closely with each other (r = 0.97). Both methods could be optimised to a similar degree while maintaining the coefficient of error at an acceptably low level. However, the stereological assessment of brain volume required between 20 min and 30 min per brain, depending on the number of points per sampling grid, compared with 1 h per brain using the planimetric method. Thus, while planimetric and stereological approaches yield very similar results, the stereological method has the advantage of greater speed and, therefore, efficiency.
我们使用磁共振成像(MRI)比较了两种估算10个福尔马林固定脑体积的方法。进行了MRI检查,然后使用两种不同的技术评估全脑体积:一种基于卡瓦列里原理的体视学点计数技术,以及一种边缘追踪技术。使用这两种技术获得的全脑体积相似,且彼此密切相关(r = 0.97)。两种方法都可以在相似程度上进行优化,同时将误差系数保持在可接受的低水平。然而,脑体积的体视学评估每个脑需要20分钟至30分钟,具体取决于每个采样网格的点数,而使用平面测量法每个脑需要1小时。因此,虽然平面测量法和体视学方法产生的结果非常相似,但体视学方法具有速度更快、因而效率更高的优势。