Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28197090›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroinformatics2017

Automated Ischemic Lesion Segmentation in MRI Mouse Brain Data after Transient Middle Cerebral Artery Occlusion.

Inge A Mulder, Artem Khmelinskii, Oleh Dzyubachyk, Sebastiaan de Jong, Nathalie Rieff, Marieke J H Wermer, Mathias Hoehn, Boudewijn P F Lelieveldt, Arn M J M van den Maagdenberg

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroinformatics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Machine learning based analysis of stroke lesions on mouse tissue sections.Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. IndividualFrontiers in immunology · 2019
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Inge A MulderDepartment of Neurology, Leiden University Medical Center Leiden, Netherlands.
Artem KhmelinskiiDivision of Image Processing (LKEB), Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical CenterLeiden, Netherlands; Percuros B.V.Enschede, Netherlands.
Oleh DzyubachykDivision of Image Processing (LKEB), Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center Leiden, Netherlands.
Sebastiaan de JongDepartment of Human Genetics, Leiden University Medical Center Leiden, Netherlands.
Nathalie RieffDepartment of Human Genetics, Leiden University Medical Center Leiden, Netherlands.
Marieke J H WermerDepartment of Neurology, Leiden University Medical Center Leiden, Netherlands.
Mathias HoehnDivision of Image Processing (LKEB), Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical CenterLeiden, Netherlands; Percuros B.V.Enschede, Netherlands; In-vivo-NMR Laboratory, Max Planck Institute for Metabolism ResearchCologne, Germany.
Boudewijn P F LelieveldtDivision of Image Processing (LKEB), Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical CenterLeiden, Netherlands; Intelligent Systems Group, Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Mathematics and Computer Science, Delft University of TechnologyDelft, Netherlands.
Arn M J M van den MaagdenbergDepartment of Neurology, Leiden University Medical CenterLeiden, Netherlands; Department of Human Genetics, Leiden University Medical CenterLeiden, Netherlands.
Leiden University Medical Center · NLDelft University of Technology · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has become increasingly important in ischemic stroke experiments in mice, especially because it enables longitudinal studies. Still, quantitative analysis of MRI data remains challenging mainly because segmentation of mouse brain lesions in MRI data heavily relies on time-consuming manual tracing and thresholding techniques. Therefore, in the present study, a fully automated approach was developed to analyze longitudinal MRI data for quantification of ischemic lesion volume progression in the mouse brain. We present a level-set-based lesion segmentation algorithm that is built using a minimal set of assumptions and requires only one MRI sequence (T2) as input. To validate our algorithm we used a heterogeneous data set consisting of 121 mouse brain scans of various age groups and time points after infarct induction and obtained using different MRI hardware and acquisition parameters. We evaluated the volumetric accuracy and regional overlap of ischemic lesions segmented by our automated method against the ground truth obtained in a semi-automated fashion that includes a highly time-consuming manual correction step. Our method shows good agreement with human observations and is accurate on heterogeneous data, whilst requiring much shorter average execution time. The algorithm developed here was compiled into a toolbox and made publically available, as well as all the data sets.

Indexed as

automated segmentationischemic strokelesionmouseMRIquantificationvolume

Identifiers

PMID28197090
PMCPMC5281583
OpenAlexW2582728534

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.