Smith Stephen M, Rao Anil, De Stefano Nicola, Jenkinson Mark, Schott Jonathan M, Matthews Paul M, Fox Nick C
Oxford University Centre for Functional MRI of the Brain (FMRIB), Oxford, UK.
Neuroimage. 2007 Jul 15;36(4):1200-6. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.04.035. Epub 2007 Apr 27.
Brain volume loss (atrophy) is widely used as a marker of disease progression. Atrophy has been measured with a variety of methods, some estimating atrophy rate from two temporally separated scans, and others estimating atrophy state from a single scan. Three popular tools for measuring brain atrophy are BSI and SIENA (rate) and SIENAX (state). Previous papers have shown BSI and SIENA to have similar accuracy, but no work has carefully compared both methods using the same data set. Here we compare these methods, using data from patients with Alzheimer's disease and age-matched controls. We also compare the SIENA longitudinal measure with atrophy state estimated by SIENAX using just the earliest scan taken from each subject. We show strong correspondence and similar sensitivity to atrophy between all 3 measures.
脑容量损失（萎缩）被广泛用作疾病进展的标志物。已经使用多种方法来测量萎缩，一些方法从两次时间上分开的扫描估计萎缩率，而其他方法从单次扫描估计萎缩状态。三种常用的测量脑萎缩的工具是BSI和SIENA（用于估计萎缩率）以及SIENAX（用于估计萎缩状态）。先前的论文表明BSI和SIENA具有相似的准确性，但尚未有研究使用相同的数据集仔细比较这两种方法。在这里，我们使用来自阿尔茨海默病患者和年龄匹配对照的数据比较这些方法。我们还将SIENA纵向测量结果与仅使用每个受试者最早的扫描由SIENAX估计的萎缩状态进行比较。我们发现所有这三种测量方法之间在萎缩方面具有很强的一致性和相似的敏感性。
