arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2003.09260q-bio.QMcs.CVeess.IVeess.SP
收藏

Accuracy of MRI Classification Algorithms in a Tertiary Memory Center Clinical Routine Cohort

AP-HP(巴黎公立医院集团);Hôpital de la Pitié-Salpêtrière(皮蒂-萨尔皮特里医院);Sorbonne Universités(索邦大学);UPMC Univ Paris 06(巴黎第六大学(皮埃尔和玛丽·居里大学));Inserm(法国国家健康与医学研究院);CNRS(法国国家科学研究中心);ICM(脑与脊髓研究所);Inria(法国国家信息与自动化研究所);Laboratoire Bordelais de Recherche en Informatique(波尔多计算机科学实验室);Brainreader;AXA Research Fund(安盛研究基金);Pierre et Marie Curie University(皮埃尔和玛丽·居里大学)
Alexandre Morin, Jorge Samper-González, Anne Bertrand, Sebastian Stroer, Didier Dormont, Aline Mendes, Pierrick Coupé, Jamila Ahdidan, Marcel Lévy, Dalila Samri… 展开作者

Alexandre Morin, Jorge Samper-González, Anne Bertrand, Sebastian Stroer, Didier Dormont, Aline Mendes, Pierrick Coupé, Jamila Ahdidan, Marcel Lévy, Dalila Samri, Harald Hampel, Bruno Dubois, Marc Teichmann, Stéphane Epelbaum, Olivier Colliot

英文摘要:

BACKGROUND:Automated volumetry software (AVS) has recently become widely available to neuroradiologists. MRI volumetry with AVS may support the diagnosis of dementias by identifying regional atrophy. Moreover, automatic classifiers using machine learning techniques have recently emerged as promising approaches to assist diagnosis. However, the performance of both AVS and automatic classifiers has been evaluated mostly in the artificial setting of research datasets.OBJECTIVE:Our aim was to evaluate the performance of two AVS and an automatic classifier in the clinical routine condition of a memory clinic.METHODS:We studied 239 patients with cognitive troubles from a single memory center cohort. Using clinical routine T1-weighted MRI, we evaluated the classification performance of: 1) univariate volumetry using two AVS (volBrain and Neuroreader$^{TM}$); 2) Support Vector Machine (SVM) automatic classifier, using either the AVS volumes (SVM-AVS), or whole gray matter (SVM-WGM); 3) reading by two neuroradiologists. The performance measure was the balanced diagnostic accuracy. The reference standard was consensus diagnosis by three neurologists using clinical, biological (cerebrospinal fluid) and imaging data and following international criteria.RESULTS:Univariate AVS volumetry provided only moderate accuracies (46% to 71% with hippocampal volume). The accuracy improved when using SVM-AVS classifier (52% to 85%), becoming close to that of SVM-WGM (52 to 90%). Visual classification by neuroradiologists ranged between SVM-AVS and SVM-WGM.CONCLUSION:In the routine practice of a memory clinic, the use of volumetric measures provided by AVS yields only moderate accuracy. Automatic classifiers can improve accuracy and could be a useful tool to assist diagnosis.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑