BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The authors compared the reproducibility of a manual and a semiautomated technique for the quantitation of white-matter lesions in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: Volumes of white-matter lesions were determined using fluid-attenuated inversion recovery MRI in 23 AIDS patients with progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy. Manual outlining was compared to an automated method based on region growing and adaptive thresholding. RESULTS: Lesion volumes from the 2 methods correlated well (61 lesions, r = 0.99, P < 10(-4)), although the volumes differed substantially (12.8% +/- 13.7%). Interscan, intrasubject reproducibility was better for the automated than the manual method (2.9% +/- 3.2% vs 12.4% +/- 16.2% volume difference, P = .02). CONCLUSION: The automated algorithm appeared more reproducible, which renders it superior to the manual method for longitudinal studies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Itti et al. (2001) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: