Sabrina Sghirripa, Gaurav Bhalerao, Ludovica Griffanti, Grace Gillis, Clare Mackay, Natalie Voets, Stephanie Wong, Mark Jenkinson, For the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative
{"title":"Evaluating Traditional, Deep Learning and Subfield Methods for Automatically Segmenting the Hippocampus From MRI","authors":"Sabrina Sghirripa, Gaurav Bhalerao, Ludovica Griffanti, Grace Gillis, Clare Mackay, Natalie Voets, Stephanie Wong, Mark Jenkinson, For the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative","doi":"10.1002/hbm.70200","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Given the relationship between hippocampal atrophy and cognitive impairment in various pathological conditions, hippocampus segmentation from MRI is an important task in neuroimaging. Manual segmentation, though considered the gold standard, is time-consuming and error-prone, leading to the development of numerous automatic segmentation methods. However, no study has yet independently compared the performance of traditional, deep learning-based and hippocampal subfield segmentation methods within a single investigation. We evaluated 10 automatic hippocampal segmentation methods (FreeSurfer, SynthSeg, FastSurfer, FIRST, e2dhipseg, Hippmapper, Hippodeep, FreeSurfer-Subfields, HippUnfold and HSF) across 3 datasets with manually segmented hippocampus labels. Performance metrics included overlap with manual labels, correlations between manual and automatic volumes, volume similarity, diagnostic group differentiation and systematically located false positives and negatives. Most methods, especially deep learning-based ones that were trained on manual labels, performed well on public datasets but showed more error and variability on clinical data. Many methods tended to over-segment, particularly at the anterior hippocampus border, but were able to distinguish between healthy controls, MCI, and dementia patients based on hippocampal volume. Our findings highlight the challenges in hippocampal segmentation from MRI and the need for more publicly accessible datasets with manual labels across diverse ages and pathological conditions.</p>","PeriodicalId":13019,"journal":{"name":"Human Brain Mapping","volume":"46 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/hbm.70200","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Brain Mapping","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hbm.70200","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NEUROIMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Given the relationship between hippocampal atrophy and cognitive impairment in various pathological conditions, hippocampus segmentation from MRI is an important task in neuroimaging. Manual segmentation, though considered the gold standard, is time-consuming and error-prone, leading to the development of numerous automatic segmentation methods. However, no study has yet independently compared the performance of traditional, deep learning-based and hippocampal subfield segmentation methods within a single investigation. We evaluated 10 automatic hippocampal segmentation methods (FreeSurfer, SynthSeg, FastSurfer, FIRST, e2dhipseg, Hippmapper, Hippodeep, FreeSurfer-Subfields, HippUnfold and HSF) across 3 datasets with manually segmented hippocampus labels. Performance metrics included overlap with manual labels, correlations between manual and automatic volumes, volume similarity, diagnostic group differentiation and systematically located false positives and negatives. Most methods, especially deep learning-based ones that were trained on manual labels, performed well on public datasets but showed more error and variability on clinical data. Many methods tended to over-segment, particularly at the anterior hippocampus border, but were able to distinguish between healthy controls, MCI, and dementia patients based on hippocampal volume. Our findings highlight the challenges in hippocampal segmentation from MRI and the need for more publicly accessible datasets with manual labels across diverse ages and pathological conditions.
期刊介绍:
Human Brain Mapping publishes peer-reviewed basic, clinical, technical, and theoretical research in the interdisciplinary and rapidly expanding field of human brain mapping. The journal features research derived from non-invasive brain imaging modalities used to explore the spatial and temporal organization of the neural systems supporting human behavior. Imaging modalities of interest include positron emission tomography, event-related potentials, electro-and magnetoencephalography, magnetic resonance imaging, and single-photon emission tomography. Brain mapping research in both normal and clinical populations is encouraged.
Article formats include Research Articles, Review Articles, Clinical Case Studies, and Technique, as well as Technological Developments, Theoretical Articles, and Synthetic Reviews. Technical advances, such as novel brain imaging methods, analyses for detecting or localizing neural activity, synergistic uses of multiple imaging modalities, and strategies for the design of behavioral paradigms and neural-systems modeling are of particular interest. The journal endorses the propagation of methodological standards and encourages database development in the field of human brain mapping.