Reproducibility evaluation of the effects of MRI defacing on brain segmentation.

MRI brain segmentation defacing

Journal

Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.)
ISSN: 2329-4302
Titre abrégé: J Med Imaging (Bellingham)
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101643461

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Nov 2023
Historique:
received: 18 05 2023
revised: 22 09 2023
accepted: 24 10 2023
pmc-release: 08 11 2024
medline: 11 12 2023
pubmed: 11 12 2023
entrez: 11 12 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Recent advances in magnetic resonance (MR) scanner quality and the rapidly improving nature of facial recognition software have necessitated the introduction of MR defacing algorithms to protect patient privacy. As a result, there are a number of MR defacing algorithms available to the neuroimaging community, with several appearing in just the last 5 years. While some qualities of these defacing algorithms, such as patient identifiability, have been explored in the previous works, the potential impact of defacing on neuroimage processing has yet to be explored. We qualitatively evaluate eight MR defacing algorithms on 179 subjects from the OASIS-3 cohort and 21 subjects from the Kirby-21 dataset. We also evaluate the effects of defacing on two neuroimaging pipelines-SLANT and FreeSurfer-by comparing the segmentation consistency between the original and defaced images. Defacing can alter brain segmentation and even lead to catastrophic failures, which are more frequent with some algorithms, such as Quickshear, MRI_Deface, and FSL_deface. Compared to FreeSurfer, SLANT is less affected by defacing. On outputs that pass the quality check, the effects of defacing are less pronounced than those of rescanning, as measured by the Dice similarity coefficient. The effects of defacing are noticeable and should not be disregarded. Extra attention, in particular, should be paid to the possibility of catastrophic failures. It is crucial to adopt a robust defacing algorithm and perform a thorough quality check before releasing defaced datasets. To improve the reliability of analysis in scenarios involving defaced MRIs, it is encouraged to include multiple brain segmentation pipelines.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38074632
doi: 10.1117/1.JMI.10.6.064001
pii: 23120GR
pmc: PMC10704191
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

064001

Informations de copyright

© 2023 Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE).

Références

Neuroimage. 2011 Feb 14;54(4):2854-66
pubmed: 21094686
Bioengineering (Basel). 2022 Oct 21;9(10):
pubmed: 36290559
Neuroimage. 2015 Jun;113:61-9
pubmed: 25797830
JAMA. 2019 Sep 3;322(9):843-856
pubmed: 31479136
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008 Apr;27(4):685-91
pubmed: 18302232
Neuroimage. 2012 Aug 15;62(2):782-90
pubmed: 21979382
Hum Brain Mapp. 2021 Aug 1;42(11):3643-3655
pubmed: 33973694
Insights Imaging. 2022 Mar 26;13(1):54
pubmed: 35348936
Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng. 2016 Feb 27;9784:
pubmed: 27127332
Neuron. 2002 Jan 31;33(3):341-55
pubmed: 11832223
Neuroimage. 2004 Jul;22(3):1060-75
pubmed: 15219578
N Engl J Med. 2019 Oct 24;381(17):1684-1686
pubmed: 31644852
J Neurosci Methods. 2016 May 1;264:47-56
pubmed: 26945974
Eur Radiol. 2020 Feb;30(2):1062-1074
pubmed: 31691120
J Neuroradiol. 2022 May;49(3):250-257
pubmed: 33727023
Hum Brain Mapp. 2007 Sep;28(9):892-903
pubmed: 17295313
Neuroimage. 2018 Feb 1;166:400-424
pubmed: 29079522
Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng. 2019 Feb;10949:
pubmed: 31762535
Neuroimage. 2021 Dec 1;244:118589
pubmed: 34563682
Med Image Anal. 2001 Jun;5(2):143-56
pubmed: 11516708
Hum Brain Mapp. 2002 Nov;17(3):143-55
pubmed: 12391568
Sci Rep. 2020 May 19;10(1):8242
pubmed: 32427874
Mol Psychiatry. 2014 Jun;19(6):659-67
pubmed: 23774715
Neuroimage. 2019 Jul 1;194:105-119
pubmed: 30910724
J Med Internet Res. 2020 Dec 10;22(12):e22739
pubmed: 33208302
Data Brief. 2018 Dec 28;22:601-604
pubmed: 30671506
Front Oncol. 2023 Feb 28;13:1120392
pubmed: 36925936
Appl Intell (Dordr). 2021;51(4):2161-2172
pubmed: 34764557
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2001 Aug 29;356(1412):1293-322
pubmed: 11545704
Neuroimage. 2021 May 1;231:117845
pubmed: 33582276
Med Image Anal. 2008 Feb;12(1):26-41
pubmed: 17659998
Neuroimage. 2012 Oct 1;62(4):2222-31
pubmed: 22366334
Data Brief. 2017 Apr 08;12:346-350
pubmed: 28491937
Neuroimage. 2011 Feb 1;54(3):2033-44
pubmed: 20851191
Front Psychiatry. 2021 Feb 24;12:617997
pubmed: 33716819
J Digit Imaging. 2012 Jun;25(3):347-51
pubmed: 22065158
Hum Brain Mapp. 2021 Dec 1;42(17):5523-5534
pubmed: 34520074
J Cogn Neurosci. 2007 Sep;19(9):1498-507
pubmed: 17714011
Neuroinformatics. 2013 Jan;11(1):65-75
pubmed: 22968671
IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed. 2009 Jan;13(1):5-9
pubmed: 19129018
Neuroimage. 2012 Aug 15;62(2):774-81
pubmed: 22248573

Auteurs

Chenyu Gao (C)

Vanderbilt University, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Nashville, Tennessee, United States.

Bennett A Landman (BA)

Vanderbilt University, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Nashville, Tennessee, United States.

Jerry L Prince (JL)

The Johns Hopkins University, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Baltimore, Maryland, United States.

Aaron Carass (A)

The Johns Hopkins University, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Baltimore, Maryland, United States.

Classifications MeSH