Comparison of automated and manual MRI volumetry of hippocampus in normal aging and dementia

Yuan Yu Hsu; Norbert Schuff; An Tao Du; Kevin Mark; Xiaoping Zhu; Dawn Hardin; Michael W. Weiner

doi:10.1002/jmri.10163

Comparison of automated and manual MRI volumetry of hippocampus in normal aging and dementia

Yuan Yu Hsu, Norbert Schuff, An Tao Du, Kevin Mark, Xiaoping Zhu, Dawn Hardin, Michael W. Weiner

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Purpose: To determine whether automatic and manual measurements of hippocampal volume differences on MRI between normal aging, cognitive impairment (CI), and Alzheimer's disease (AD) yield similar results. Materials and Methods: Reliability was determined for an automatic and a manual method on nine volunteers (22-83 years old) who underwent MRI twice in 1 day. Hippocampal volumes of 20 cognitively normal subjects (mean age 74.0 ± 6.2 years) and age-matched patients (20 CI and 20 AD) were compared. Results: The intraclass correlation for automatic calculations of hippocampal volume was 0.94; for manual tracing it was 0.99. Volume differences between cognitively normal, CI, and AD subjects from the automatic and manual methods were similar. Conclusion: Because the automatic calculations were faster and less susceptible to rater bias than manual tracing, this automated method is expected to be very useful for analyzing hippocampal changes in studies of aging and dementia.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	305-310
Number of pages	5
Journal	Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Volume	16
Issue number	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.10163
Publication status	Published - Sept 2002

Keywords

Atrophy
Brain mapping
Neurodegeneration
Neuroimaging
Reliability

Access to Document

10.1002/jmri.10163

Cite this

@article{0e220ae567b246a1a2274d705c2f4f23,

title = "Comparison of automated and manual MRI volumetry of hippocampus in normal aging and dementia",

abstract = "Purpose: To determine whether automatic and manual measurements of hippocampal volume differences on MRI between normal aging, cognitive impairment (CI), and Alzheimer's disease (AD) yield similar results. Materials and Methods: Reliability was determined for an automatic and a manual method on nine volunteers (22-83 years old) who underwent MRI twice in 1 day. Hippocampal volumes of 20 cognitively normal subjects (mean age 74.0 ± 6.2 years) and age-matched patients (20 CI and 20 AD) were compared. Results: The intraclass correlation for automatic calculations of hippocampal volume was 0.94; for manual tracing it was 0.99. Volume differences between cognitively normal, CI, and AD subjects from the automatic and manual methods were similar. Conclusion: Because the automatic calculations were faster and less susceptible to rater bias than manual tracing, this automated method is expected to be very useful for analyzing hippocampal changes in studies of aging and dementia.",

keywords = "Atrophy, Brain mapping, Neurodegeneration, Neuroimaging, Reliability",

author = "Hsu, {Yuan Yu} and Norbert Schuff and Du, {An Tao} and Kevin Mark and Xiaoping Zhu and Dawn Hardin and Weiner, {Michael W.}",

year = "2002",

month = sep,

doi = "10.1002/jmri.10163",

language = "English",

volume = "16",

pages = "305--310",

journal = "Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging",

issn = "1522-2586",

publisher = "John Wiley & Sons Ltd",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of automated and manual MRI volumetry of hippocampus in normal aging and dementia

AU - Hsu, Yuan Yu

AU - Schuff, Norbert

AU - Du, An Tao

AU - Mark, Kevin

AU - Zhu, Xiaoping

AU - Hardin, Dawn

AU - Weiner, Michael W.

PY - 2002/9

Y1 - 2002/9

N2 - Purpose: To determine whether automatic and manual measurements of hippocampal volume differences on MRI between normal aging, cognitive impairment (CI), and Alzheimer's disease (AD) yield similar results. Materials and Methods: Reliability was determined for an automatic and a manual method on nine volunteers (22-83 years old) who underwent MRI twice in 1 day. Hippocampal volumes of 20 cognitively normal subjects (mean age 74.0 ± 6.2 years) and age-matched patients (20 CI and 20 AD) were compared. Results: The intraclass correlation for automatic calculations of hippocampal volume was 0.94; for manual tracing it was 0.99. Volume differences between cognitively normal, CI, and AD subjects from the automatic and manual methods were similar. Conclusion: Because the automatic calculations were faster and less susceptible to rater bias than manual tracing, this automated method is expected to be very useful for analyzing hippocampal changes in studies of aging and dementia.

AB - Purpose: To determine whether automatic and manual measurements of hippocampal volume differences on MRI between normal aging, cognitive impairment (CI), and Alzheimer's disease (AD) yield similar results. Materials and Methods: Reliability was determined for an automatic and a manual method on nine volunteers (22-83 years old) who underwent MRI twice in 1 day. Hippocampal volumes of 20 cognitively normal subjects (mean age 74.0 ± 6.2 years) and age-matched patients (20 CI and 20 AD) were compared. Results: The intraclass correlation for automatic calculations of hippocampal volume was 0.94; for manual tracing it was 0.99. Volume differences between cognitively normal, CI, and AD subjects from the automatic and manual methods were similar. Conclusion: Because the automatic calculations were faster and less susceptible to rater bias than manual tracing, this automated method is expected to be very useful for analyzing hippocampal changes in studies of aging and dementia.

KW - Atrophy

KW - Brain mapping

KW - Neurodegeneration

KW - Neuroimaging

KW - Reliability

U2 - 10.1002/jmri.10163

DO - 10.1002/jmri.10163

M3 - Article

SN - 1522-2586

VL - 16

SP - 305

EP - 310

JO - Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

JF - Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

IS - 3

ER -

Comparison of automated and manual MRI volumetry of hippocampus in normal aging and dementia

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this