Department of Neuroscience, School of Translational Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Department of Neurology, Alfred Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Department of Neurology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Department of Neuroscience, School of Translational Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Department of Neurology, Alfred Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Neuroimage. 2024 Aug 1;296:120682. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2024.120682. Epub 2024 Jun 10.
Accurate resection cavity segmentation on MRI is important for neuroimaging research involving epilepsy surgical outcomes. Manual segmentation, the gold standard, is highly labour intensive. Automated pipelines are an efficient potential solution; however, most have been developed for use following temporal epilepsy surgery. Our aim was to compare the accuracy of four automated segmentation pipelines following surgical resection in a mixed cohort of subjects following temporal or extra temporal epilepsy surgery. We identified 4 open-source automated segmentation pipelines. Epic-CHOP and ResectVol utilise SPM-12 within MATLAB, while Resseg and Deep Resection utilise 3D U-net convolutional neural networks. We manually segmented the resection cavity of 50 consecutive subjects who underwent epilepsy surgery (30 temporal, 20 extratemporal). We calculated Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) for each algorithm compared to the manual segmentation. No algorithm identified all resection cavities. ResectVol (n = 44, 88 %) and Epic-CHOP (n = 42, 84 %) were able to detect more resection cavities than Resseg (n = 22, 44 %, P < 0.001) and Deep Resection (n = 23, 46 %, P < 0.001). The SPM-based pipelines (Epic-CHOP and ResectVol) performed better than the deep learning-based pipelines in the overall and extratemporal surgery cohorts. In the temporal cohort, the SPM-based pipelines had higher detection rates, however there was no difference in the accuracy between methods. These pipelines could be applied to machine learning studies of outcome prediction to improve efficiency in pre-processing data, however human quality control is still required.
MRI 上准确的切除腔分割对于涉及癫痫手术结果的神经影像学研究很重要。手动分割是金标准,但非常耗费人力。自动化流水线是一种高效的潜在解决方案;然而,大多数都是为颞叶癫痫手术后使用而开发的。我们的目的是比较 4 种自动化分割流水线在颞叶或颞叶外癫痫手术后混合队列中的准确性。我们确定了 4 种开源自动化分割流水线。Epic-CHOP 和 ResectVol 在 MATLAB 中使用 SPM-12,而 Resseg 和 Deep Resection 使用 3D U-net 卷积神经网络。我们手动分割了 50 名连续接受癫痫手术的患者的切除腔(30 名颞叶,20 名颞叶外)。我们计算了每个算法与手动分割的 Dice 相似系数(DSC)。没有一个算法能识别出所有的切除腔。ResectVol(n = 44,88%)和 Epic-CHOP(n = 42,84%)比 Resseg(n = 22,44%,P < 0.001)和 Deep Resection(n = 23,46%,P < 0.001)能检测到更多的切除腔。基于 SPM 的流水线(Epic-CHOP 和 ResectVol)在总体和颞叶外手术队列中的性能优于基于深度学习的流水线。在颞叶队列中,基于 SPM 的流水线的检测率较高,但方法之间的准确性没有差异。这些流水线可应用于机器学习研究中,以提高数据预处理的效率,但仍需要人工质量控制。