• Investigative Magnetic Resonance Imaging
• /
• 제24권2호
• /
• pp.76-84
• /
• 2020

Background: Determination of inter-method differences between clinically available volumetry methods are essential for the clinical application of brain volumetry in a wider context. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine the inter-method reliability and differences between the Siemens morphometry (SM) software and the NeuroQuant (NQ) software. Materials and Methods: MR images of 86 subjects with subjective or objective cognitive impairment were included in this retrospective study. For this study, 3D T1 volume images were obtained in all subjects using a 3T MR scanner (Skyra 3T, Siemens). Volumetric analysis of the 3D T1 volume images was performed using SM and NQ. To analyze the inter-method difference, correlation, and reliability, we used the paired t-test, Bland-Altman plot, Pearson's correlation coefficient, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and effect size (ES) using the MedCalc and SPSS software. Results: SM and NQ showed excellent reliability for cortical gray matter, cerebral white matter, and cerebrospinal fluid; and good reliability for intracranial volume, whole brain volume, both thalami, and both hippocampi. In contrast, poor reliability was observed for both basal ganglia including the caudate nucleus, putamen, and pallidum. Paired comparison revealed that while the mean volume of the right hippocampus was not different between the two software, the mean difference in the left hippocampus volume between the two methods was 0.17 ml (P < 0.001). The other brain regions showed significant differences in terms of measured volumes between the two software. Conclusion: SM and NQ provided good-to-excellent reliability in evaluating most brain structures, except for the basal ganglia in patients with cognitive impairment. Researchers and clinicians should be aware of the potential differences in the measured volumes when using these two different software interchangeably.

• 대한영상의학회지
• /
• 제84권5호
• /
• pp.1080-1090
• /
• 2023

목적 이 연구의 목적은 한국 인구에서 NeuroQuant (이하 NQ)와 DeepBrain (이하 DB)에서 측정된 뇌 용적과 정상규준 백분위수를 비교하고, 두개골 형태와의 연관성을 확인하는 것이다. 대상과 방법 이 연구는 구조적 뇌 이상이 없는 163명의 한국인을 대상으로 NQ와 DB에서 측정된 뇌 용적과 정상규준 백분위수를 비교하고, 두개골 형태와의 연관성을 확인한 후향적 연구이다. 급내상관계수분석과 선형분석의 통계학적 분석을 시행하였다. 결과 정상규준 백분위수는 시상(90.8 vs. 63.3 percentile), 피각(90.0 vs. 60.0 percentile), 그리고 두정엽(80.1 vs. 74.1 percentile)에서 NQ가 DB보다 더 큰 것으로 나타났고, 후두엽(18.4 vs. 68.5 percentile)은 DB가 NQ보다 큰 것으로 나타났으며, 특히 후두엽의 경우 두개골 형태와의 비교 연구에서 유의미한 연관성을 보였고, 두개골의 전후 방향의 길이와 비례하고 상하방향의 길이와는 반비례했다. 결론 NQ와 DB에서 얻은 정상규준 백분위는 각 뇌 영역마다 유의미한 차이를 보였고, 그 차이는 한국 인구의 두개골 형태와 유의미한 관계가 있었다.

• Korean Journal of Radiology
• /
• 제22권3호
• /
• pp.405-414
• /
• 2021

Objective: To compare two clinically available MR volumetry software, NeuroQuant^® (NQ) and Inbrain^® (IB), and examine the inter-method reliabilities and differences between them. Materials and Methods: This study included 172 subjects (age range, 55-88 years; mean age, 71.2 years), comprising 45 normal healthy subjects, 85 patients with mild cognitive impairment, and 42 patients with Alzheimer's disease. Magnetic resonance imaging scans were analyzed with IB and NQ. Mean differences were compared with the paired t test. Inter-method reliability was evaluated with Pearson's correlation coefficients and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Effect sizes were also obtained to document the standardized mean differences. Results: The paired t test showed significant volume differences in most regions except for the amygdala between the two methods. Nevertheless, inter-method measurements between IB and NQ showed good to excellent reliability (0.72 < r < 0.96, 0.83 < ICC < 0.98) except for the pallidum, which showed poor reliability (left: r = 0.03, ICC = 0.06; right: r = -0.05, ICC = -0.09). For the measurements of effect size, volume differences were large in most regions (0.05 < r < 6.15). The effect size was the largest in the pallidum and smallest in the cerebellum. Conclusion: Comparisons between IB and NQ showed significantly different volume measurements with large effect sizes. However, they showed good to excellent inter-method reliability in volumetric measurements for all brain regions, with the exception of the pallidum. Clinicians using these commercial software should take into consideration that different volume measurements could be obtained depending on the software used.

• Investigative Magnetic Resonance Imaging
• /
• 제25권3호
• /
• pp.164-171
• /
• 2021

Purpose: Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is a prodromal stage of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Brain atrophy in this disease spectrum begins in the medial temporal lobe structure, which can be recognized by magnetic resonance imaging. To overcome the unsatisfactory inter-observer reliability of visual evaluation, quantitative brain volumetry has been developed and widely investigated for the diagnosis of MCI and AD. The aim of this study was to assess the prediction accuracy of quantitative brain volumetry using a fully automated segmentation software package, NeuroQuant^®, for the diagnosis of MCI. Materials and Methods: A total of 418 subjects from the Korean Brain Aging Study for Early Diagnosis and Prediction of Alzheimer's Disease cohort were included in our study. Each participant was allocated to either a cognitively normal old group (n = 285) or an MCI group (n = 133). Brain volumetric data were obtained from T1-weighted images using the NeuroQuant software package. Logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses were performed to investigate relevant brain regions and their prediction accuracies. Results: Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that normative percentiles of the hippocampus (P < 0.001), amygdala (P = 0.003), frontal lobe (P = 0.049), medial parietal lobe (P = 0.023), and third ventricle (P = 0.012) were independent predictive factors for MCI. In ROC analysis, normative percentiles of the hippocampus and amygdala showed fair accuracies in the diagnosis of MCI (area under the curve: 0.739 and 0.727, respectively). Conclusion: Normative percentiles of the hippocampus and amygdala provided by the fully automated segmentation software could be used for screening MCI with a reasonable post-processing time. This information might help us interpret structural MRI in patients with cognitive impairment.

• Korean Journal of Radiology
• /
• 제23권10호
• /
• pp.959-975
• /
• 2022

Objective: To investigate the agreement and reliability of estimating the volumes and normative percentiles (N%) of segmented brain regions among NeuroQuant (NQ), DeepBrain (DB), and FreeSurfer (FS) software programs, focusing on the comparison between NQ and DB. Materials and Methods: Three-dimensional T1-weighted images of 145 participants (48 healthy participants, 50 patients with mild cognitive impairment, and 47 patients with Alzheimer's disease) from a single medical center (SMC) dataset and 130 participants from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) dataset were included in this retrospective study. All images were analyzed with DB, NQ, and FS software to obtain volume estimates and N% of various segmented brain regions. We used Bland-Altman analysis, repeated measures ANOVA, reproducibility coefficient, effect size, and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) to evaluate inter-method agreement and reliability. Results: Among the three software programs, the Bland-Altman plot showed a substantial bias, the ICC showed a broad range of reliability (0.004-0.97), and repeated-measures ANOVA revealed significant mean volume differences in all brain regions. Similarly, the volume differences of the three software programs had large effect sizes in most regions (0.73-5.51). The effect size was largest in the pallidum in both datasets and smallest in the thalamus and cerebral white matter in the SMC and ADNI datasets, respectively. N% of NQ and DB showed an unacceptably broad Bland-Altman limit of agreement in all brain regions and a very wide range of ICC values (-0.142-0.844) in most brain regions. Conclusion: NQ and DB showed significant differences in the measured volume and N%, with limited agreement and reliability for most brain regions. Therefore, users should be aware of the lack of interchangeability between these software programs when they are applied in clinical practice.