Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40800745›Full record

ArticleImaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)2025

Automatic segmentation of spinal cord lesions in MS: A robust tool for axial T2-weighted MRI scans.

Enamundram Naga Karthik, Julian McGinnis, Ricarda Wurm, Sebastian Ruehling, Robert Graf, Jan Valosek, Pierre-Louis Benveniste, Markus Lauerer, Jason Talbott, Rohit Bakshi and 10 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

20 authors.

Enamundram Naga KarthikNeuroPoly Lab, Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Polytechnique Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2940-5514
Julian McGinnisChair for AI in Healthcare and Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-2224-7600
Ricarda WurmDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine and Health, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-2039-3685
Sebastian RuehlingDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine and Health, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Robert GrafChair for AI in Healthcare and Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6656-3680
Jan ValosekNeuroPoly Lab, Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Polytechnique Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7398-4990
Pierre-Louis BenvenisteNeuroPoly Lab, Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Polytechnique Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-3122-1957
Markus LauererDepartment of Neurology, School of Medicine and Health, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5711-0054
Jason TalbottDepartment of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, University of California, San Francisco, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3943-5530
Rohit BakshiBrigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8601-5534
Shahamat TauhidBrigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States.
Timothy ShepherdNYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0232-1636
Achim BertheleDepartment of Neurology, School of Medicine and Health, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9650-6222
Claus ZimmerDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine and Health, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4805-9103
Bernhard HemmerDepartment of Neurology, School of Medicine and Health, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5985-6784
Daniel RueckertChair for AI in Healthcare and Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5683-5889
Benedikt WiestlerAI for Image-Guided Diagnosis and Therapy, School of Medicine and Health, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5683-5889
Jan S KirschkeDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine and Health, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7557-0003
Julien Cohen-AdadNeuroPoly Lab, Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Polytechnique Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3662-9532
Mark MühlauDepartment of Neurology, School of Medicine and Health, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9545-2709

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deep learning models have achieved remarkable success in segmenting brain white matter lesions in multiple sclerosis (MS), becoming integral to both research and clinical workflows. While brain lesions have gained significant attention in MS research, the involvement of spinal cord lesions in MS is relatively understudied. This is largely owing to the variability in spinal cord magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) acquisition protocols, high individual anatomical differences, the complex morphology and size of spinal cord lesions, and lastly, the scarcity of labeled datasets required to develop robust segmentation tools. As a result, automatic segmentation of spinal cord MS lesions remains a significant challenge. Although some segmentation tools exist for spinal cord lesions, most have been developed using sagittal T2-weighted (T2w) sequences primarily focusing on cervical spines. With the growing importance of spinal cord imaging in MS, axial T2w scans are becoming increasingly relevant due to their superior sensitivity in detecting lesions compared to sagittal acquisition protocols. However, most existing segmentation methods struggle to effectively generalize to axial sequences due to differences in image characteristics caused by the highly anisotropic spinal cord scans. To address these challenges, we developed a robust, open-source lesion segmentation tool tailored specifically for axial T2w scans covering the whole spinal cord. We investigated key factors influencing lesion segmentation, including the impact of stitching together individually acquired spinal regions, straightening the spinal cord, and comparing the effectiveness of 2D and 3D convolutional neural networks (CNNs). Drawing on these insights, we trained a multi-center model using an extensive dataset of 582 MS patients, resulting in a dataset comprising an entirety of 2,167 scans. We empirically evaluated the model's segmentation performance across various spinal segments for lesions with varying sizes. Our model significantly outperforms the current state-of-the-art methods, providing consistent segmentation across cervical, thoracic, and lumbar regions. To support the broader research community, we integrate our model into the widely-used Spinal Cord Toolbox (v7.0 and above), making it accessible via the command sct_deepseg lesion_ms_axial_t2 -i <path-to-image.nii.gz>.

Indexed as

deep learninglesionsMRImultiple sclerosissegmentationspinal cord

Identifiers

PMID40800745
PMCPMC12319988

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.