Improving the SIENA performance using BEaST brain extraction

• Published in: PloS one Vol. 13; no. 9; p. e0196945
• Main Authors: Nakamura, Kunio, Eskildsen, Simon F, Narayanan, Sridar, Arnold, Douglas L, Collins, D Louis
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Public Library of Science 20.09.2018; Public Library of Science (PLoS)
• Subjects: Alzheimer's disease; Analysis; Biology and Life Sciences; Brain - diagnostic imaging; Diagnosis; Engineering and Technology; Humans; Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods; Knowledge; Magnetic resonance imaging; Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods; Medicine and Health Sciences; Neuroimaging - methods; Research and Analysis Methods
• ISSN: 1932-6203; 1932-6203
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0196945

We present an improved image analysis pipeline to detect the percent brain volume change (PBVC) using SIENA (Structural Image Evaluation, using Normalization, of Atrophy) in populations with Alzheimer's dementia. Our proposed approach uses the improved brain extraction mask from BEaST (Brain Extraction based on nonlocal Segmentation Technique) instead of the conventional BET (Brain Extraction Tool) for SIENA. We compared four varying options of BET as well as BEaST and applied these five methods to analyze scan-rescan MRIs in ADNI from 332 subjects, longitudinal ADNI MRIs from the same 332 subjects, their repeat scans over time, and OASIS longitudinal MRIs from 123 subjects. The results showed that BEaST brain masks were consistent in scan-rescan reproducibility. The cross-sectional scan-rescan error in the absolute percent brain volume difference measured by SIENA was smallest (p≤0.0187) with the proposed BEaST-SIENA. We evaluated the statistical power in terms of effect size, and the best performance was achieved with BEaST-SIENA (1.2789 for ADNI and 1.095 for OASIS). The absolute difference in PBVC between scan-dataset (volume change from baseline to year-1) and rescan-dataset (volume change from baseline repeat scan to year-1 repeat scan) was also the smallest with BEaST-SIENA compared to the BET-based SIENA and had the highest correlation when compared to the BET-based SIENA variants. In conclusion, our study shows that BEaST was robust in terms of reproducibility and consistency and that SIENA's reproducibility and statistical power are improved in multiple datasets when used in combination with BEaST.