2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.nicl.2018.09.032
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Clinical validation of automated hippocampal segmentation in temporal lobe epilepsy

Abstract: ObjectiveTo provide a multi-atlas framework for automated hippocampus segmentation in temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) and clinically validate the results with respect to surgical lateralization and post-surgical outcome.MethodsWe retrospectively identified 47 TLE patients who underwent surgical resection and 12 healthy controls. T1-weighted 3 T MRI scans were acquired for all subjects, and patients were identified by a neuroradiologist with regards to lateralization and degree of hippocampal sclerosis (HS). Autom… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
16
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
0
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…T1w source images were converted to NIfTI format and interpolated up to .25‐mm isotropic resolution. They were then processed using the ASHS software package 34 with the Penn Temporal Lobe Epilepsy T1‐MRI Whole Hippocampus ASHS Atlas 35 to generate ultra‐high‐resolution hippocampal segmentations. Segmentation in the superresolution space captures surface contours that are encoded in the grayscale data of the native resolution images but not visible in native resolution segmentations 29 .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…T1w source images were converted to NIfTI format and interpolated up to .25‐mm isotropic resolution. They were then processed using the ASHS software package 34 with the Penn Temporal Lobe Epilepsy T1‐MRI Whole Hippocampus ASHS Atlas 35 to generate ultra‐high‐resolution hippocampal segmentations. Segmentation in the superresolution space captures surface contours that are encoded in the grayscale data of the native resolution images but not visible in native resolution segmentations 29 .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…7T MPRAGE images from all four patients were linearly registered to the respective CEST maps using Advanced Normalization Tools (ANTs) (Avants, Tustison, Song, et al., 2011). ASHS segmentation (an automated technique for segmenting hippocampal subfields and extra‐hippocampal medial temporal cortices from high‐resolution T2w‐MRI at 7T MRI) was then performed on 7T oblique coronal T2‐weighted imaging acquired perpendicular to the long axis of the hippocampus which resulted in segmentations of bilateral subfields of the hippocampi (Hadar et al., 2018; Shah et al., 2018). The segmentation included subiculum, Cornu Ammonis (CA) 1, 2, and 3 and dentate gyrus (DG).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…CA2 and CA3 were not included in the primary analyses because of the lower reliability of these regions, as opposed to the more reliable CA1, DG, and subiculum; this has been previously noted in the ASHS technique and is thought to be potentially due to inherent error and sampling issues involved in gross geometrical approximations of cellular transitions (Schoene‐Bake et al., 2014; Wisse et al., 2016). Overall, ASHS has been both pathologically and clinically validated (Hadar et al., 2018; Wisse et al., 2016). Supplementary analysis of the volumes was conducted on all hippocampal subfields.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…More recent work based on nonconventional contrasts, including diffusion 29 and network parameters, [30][31][32] has targeted whole-brain anomalies in patients with MRI-positive TLE. Only 2 previous studies have addressed the lateralization challenge in both MRI-positive and MRI-negative TLE, 33,34 operating on T1-derived volumetry with groups predefined by side and visibility of hippocampal atrophy on MRI. In 1 study, 33 besides the lack of histopathologic confirmation, anatomic structures identifying TLE groups were mainly outside the mesiotemporal lobe, different across groups, and difficult to interpret, particularly in MRI-negative patients.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%