Bocchetta, Martina

Abstract Background This study aimed to have international experts converge on a harmonized definition of whole hippocampus boundaries and segmentation procedures, to define standard operating procedures for magnetic resonance (MR)‐based manual hippocampal segmentation. Methods The panel received a questionnaire regarding whole hippocampus boundaries and segmentation procedures. Quantitative information was supplied to allow evidence‐based answers. A recursive and anonymous Delphi procedure was used to achieve convergence. Significance of agreement among panelists was assessed by exact probability on Fisher's and binomial tests. Results Agreement was significant on the inclusion of alveus/fimbria ( P = .021), whole hippocampal tail ( P = .013), medial border of the body according to visible morphology ( P = .0006), and on this combined set of features ( P = .001). This definition captures 100% of hippocampal tissue, 100% of Alzheimer’s disease‐related atrophy, and demonstrated good reliability on preliminary intrarater (0.98) and inter‐rater (0.94) estimates. Discussion Consensus was achieved among international experts with respect to hippocampal segmentation using MR resulting in a harmonized segmentation protocol.

ABSTRACTBACKGROUND AND PURPOSEAn effort to define and validate a Harmonized Protocol for standard hippocampal segmentation is being carried out. We wished to estimate the effect of magnetic resonance image (MRI) spatial orientation on manual hippocampal segmentations to define optimal standard orientation of MRIs for hippocampal volumetry.METHODSThree expert tracers segmented twice the hippocampi of 10 ADNI subjects on MRI slices oriented perpendicular to the anterior‐posterior commissure (AC‐PC) line and the long hippocampal axes plane, following internationally harmonized landmarks. We computed intra and interrater reliability figures for total volumes and similarity coefficients.RESULTSTotal volume reliability was similar for both orientations. Similarity coefficients were significantly higher for the AC‐PC orientation (exact P = 0.002).DISCUSSIONThese data show that AC‐PC orientation is slightly more reliable for manual segmentations, possibly due to better visualization of the cerebrospinal fluid spaces separating hippocampal head and amygdala. A Delphi panel of experts has used these data to decide on the optimal orientation for a Harmonized Protocol for hippocampal segmentation.

AbstractBackgroundHippocampal volumetry on magnetic resonance imaging is recognized as an Alzheimer's disease (AD) biomarker, and manual segmentation is the gold standard for measurement. However, a standard procedure is lacking. We operationalize and quantitate landmark differences to help a Delphi panel converge on a set of landmarks.MethodsOne hundred percent of anatomic landmark variability across 12 different protocols for manual segmentation was reduced into four segmentation units (the minimum hippocampus, the alveus/fimbria, the tail, and the subiculum), which were segmented on magnetic resonance images by expert raters to estimate reliability and AD‐related atrophy.ResultsIntra‐ and interrater reliability were more than 0.96 and 0.92, respectively, except for the alveus/fimbria, which were 0.86 and 0.77, respectively. Of all AD‐related atrophy, the minimum hippocampus contributed to 67%; tail, 24%; alveus/fimbria, 4%; and the subiculum, 5%.ConclusionsAnatomic landmark variability in available protocols can be reduced to four discrete and measurable segmentation units. Their quantitative assessment will help a Delphi panel to define a set of landmarks for a harmonized protocol.