Automated Integration of Multimodal MRI for the Probabilistic Detection of the Central Vein Sign in White Matter Lesions

References

1. 1.↵
   2. McDonald WI,
   3. Compston A,
   4. Edan G, et al

   . Recommended diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: guidelines from the International Panel on the Diagnosis of Multiple Sclerosis. Ann Neurol 2001;50:121–127 pmid:11456302

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
2. 2.↵
   2. Solomon AJ,
   3. Klein EP,
   4. Bourdette D

   . “Undiagnosing” multiple sclerosis: the challenge of misdiagnosis in MS. Neurology 2012;78:1986–91 doi:10.1212/WNL.0b013e318259e1b2 pmid:22581930

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
3. 3.↵
   2. Solomon AJ,
   3. Bourdette DN,
   4. Cross AH, et al

   . The contemporary spectrum of multiple sclerosis misdiagnosis: a multicenter study. Neurology 2016;87:1393–99 doi:10.1212/WNL.0000000000003152 pmid:27581217

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
4. 4.↵
   2. Aliaga ES,
   3. Barkhof F

   . MRI mimics of multiple sclerosis. Handb Clin Neurol 2014;122:291–316 doi:10.1016/B978-0-444-52001-2.00012-1 pmid:24507523

   CrossRefPubMed
5. 5.↵
   2. Miller DH,
   3. Weinshenker BG,
   4. Filippi M, et al

   . Differential diagnosis of suspected multiple sclerosis: a consensus approach. Mult Scler 2008;14:1157–74 doi:10.1177/1352458508096878 pmid:18805839

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
6. 6.↵
   2. Fog T

   . On the vessel-plaque relationships in the brain in multiple sclerosis. Acta Neurol Scand Suppl 1964;40:(Suppl 10):9–15 pmid:14194816

   PubMed
7. 7.↵
   2. Tallantyre EC,
   3. Dixon JE,
   4. Donaldson I, et al

   . Ultra-high-field imaging distinguishes MS lesions from asymptomatic white matter lesions. Neurology 2011;76:534–39 doi:10.1212/WNL.0b013e31820b7630 pmid:21300968

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
8. 8.↵
   2. Reichenbach JR,
   3. Venkatesan R,
   4. Schillinge DJ, et al

   . Small vessels in the human brain: MR venography with deoxyhemoglobin as an intrinsic contrast agent. Radiology 1997;204:272–77 doi:10.1148/radiology.204.1.9205259 pmid:9205259

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
9. 9.↵
   2. Sati P,
   3. George IC,
   4. Shea C, et al

   . FLAIR*: a combined MR contrast technique for visualizing white matter lesions and parenchymal veins. Radiology 2012;265:926–32 doi:10.1148/radiol.12120208 pmid:23074257

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
10. 10.↵
    2. Campion T,
    3. Smith RJ,
    4. Altmann DR, et al

    . FLAIR* to visualize veins in white matter lesions: a new tool for the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis? Eur Radiol 2017;27:4257–63 doi:10.1007/s00330-017-4822-z pmid:28409356

    CrossRefPubMed
11. 11.↵
    2. Kilsdonk ID,
    3. Wattjes MP,
    4. Lopez-Soriano A, et al

    . Improved differentiation between MS and vascular brain lesions using FLAIR* at 7 Tesla. Eur Radiol 2014;24:841–49 doi:10.1007/s00330-013-3080-y pmid:24317461

    CrossRefPubMed
12. 12.↵
    2. Kister I,
    3. Herbert J,
    4. Zhou Y, et al

    . Ultrahigh-field MR (7 T) imaging of brain lesions in neuromyelitis optica. Mult Scler 2013;2013:398259 doi:10.1155/2013/398259 pmid:23431447

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    2. Mistry N,
    3. Abdel-Fahim R,
    4. Samaraweera A, et al

    . Imaging central veins in brain lesions with 3-T T2*-weighted magnetic resonance imaging differentiates multiple sclerosis from microangiopathic brain lesions. Mult Scler 2016;22:1289–96 doi:10.1177/1352458515616700 pmid:26658816

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.↵
    2. Sinnecker T,
    3. Dörr J,
    4. Pfueller CF, et al

    . Distinct lesion morphology at 7-T MRI differentiates neuromyelitis optica from multiple sclerosis. Neurology 2012;79:708–14 doi:10.1212/WNL.0b013e3182648bc8 pmid:22855861

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
15. 15.↵
    2. Solomon AJ,
    3. Schindler MK,
    4. Howard DB, et al

    . “Central vessel sign” on 3T FLAIR* MRI for the differentiation of multiple sclerosis from migraine. Ann Clin Transl Neurol 2016:3:82–87 doi:10.1002/acn3.273 pmid:26900578

    CrossRefPubMed
16. 16.↵
    2. Wuerfel J,
    3. Sinnecker T,
    4. Ringelstein EB, et al

    . Lesion morphology at 7 Tesla MRI differentiates Susac syndrome from multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 2012;18:1592–99 doi:10.1177/1352458512441270 pmid:22711711

    CrossRefPubMed
17. 17.↵
    2. Solomon AJ,
    3. Watts R,
    4. Ontaneda D, et al

    . Diagnostic performance of central vein sign for multiple sclerosis with a simplified three-lesion algorithm. Mult Scler 2018;24:750–57 doi:10.1177/1352458517726383 pmid:28820013

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    2. Maggi P,
    3. Absinta M,
    4. Grammatico M, et al

    . Central vein sign differentiates multiple sclerosis from central nervous system inflammatory vasculopathies. Ann Neurol 2018;83:283–94 doi:10.1002/ana. 25146 pmid:29328521

    CrossRefPubMed
19. 19.↵
    2. Sati P,
    3. Oh J,
    4. Constable RT, et al

    ; NAIMS Cooperative. The central vein sign and its clinical evaluation for the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: a consensus statement from the North American Imaging in Multiple Sclerosis Cooperative. Nat Rev Neurol 2016;12:714–22 doi:10.1038/nrneurol.2016.166 pmid:27834394

    CrossRefPubMed
20. 20.↵
    1. Wells WM,
    2. Colchester A,
    3. Delp S

    2. Frangi AF,
    3. Niessen WJ,
    4. Vincken KL, et al

    . Multiscale vessel enhancement filtering. In: Wells WM, Colchester A, Delp S, eds. Proceedings of Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention–MICCAI'98, Cambridge, Massachusetts. October 11–18, 1998
21. 21.↵
    2. Valcarcel AM,
    3. Linn KA,
    4. Vandekar SN, et al

    . MIMoSA: an automated method for intermodal segmentation analysis of multiple sclerosis brain lesions. J Neuroimaging 2018;28:389–98 doi:10.1111/jon.12506 pmid:29516669

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. http://www.r-project.org. Accessed June 19, 2018.
23. 23.↵
    2. Sweeney EM,
    3. Shinohara RT,
    4. Shiee N, et al

    . OASIS is automated statistical inference for segmentation, with applications to multiple sclerosis lesion segmentation in MRI. Neuroimage Clin 2013;2:402–13 doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2013.03.002 pmid:24179794

    CrossRefPubMed
24. 24.↵
    2. Dworkin JD,
    3. Linn KA,
    4. Oguz I, et al

    ; North American Imaging in Multiple Sclerosis Cooperative. An automated statistical technique for counting distinct multiple sclerosis lesions. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2018;39:626–33 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5556 pmid:29472300

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
25. 25.↵
    1. Crimi A,
    2. Bakas S,
    3. Kuijf H

    2. Oguz I,
    3. Carass A,
    4. Pham DL, et al

    . Dice overlap measures for objects of unknown number: application to lesion segmentation. In: Crimi A, Bakas S, Kuijf H, eds. Brainlesion: Glioma, Multiple Sclerosis, Stroke and Traumatic Brain Injuries. Berlin: Springer-Verlag International Publishing; 2018;10670:3–14
26. 26.↵
    2. Zhang Y,
    3. Brady M,
    4. Smith S

    . Segmentation of brain MR images through a hidden Markov random field model and the expectation-maximization algorithm. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2001;20:45–57 doi:10.1109/42.906424 pmid:11293691

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
27. 27.↵
    2. Perona P,
    3. Malik J

    . Scale-space and edge detection using anisotropic diffusion. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 1990;12:629–39 doi:10.1109/34.56205

    CrossRefWeb of Science
28. 28.↵
    2. Sati P1,
    3. Thomasson DM,
    4. Li N, et al

    . Rapid, high-resolution, whole-brain, susceptibility-based MRI of multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 2014;20:1464–70 doi:10.1177/1352458514525868 pmid:24639479

    CrossRefPubMed
29. 29.↵
    2. Tustison NJ,
    3. Avants BB,
    4. Cook PA, et al

    . N4ITK: improved N3 bias correction. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2010;29:1310–20 doi:10.1109/TMI.2010.2046908 pmid:20378467

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
30. 30.↵
    2. Carass A,
    3. Wheeler MB,
    4. Cuzzocreo JP, et al

    . A joint registration and segmentation approach to skull stripping. http://www.iacl.ece.jhu.edu/~prince/pubs/2007-ISBI-Carass-SkullStripping.pdf. Accessed June 19, 2018.
31. 31.↵
    2. DeLong E,
    3. DeLong DM,
    4. Clarke-Pearson DL

    . Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 1988;44:837–45 doi:10.2307/2531595 pmid:3203132

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
32. 32.↵
    2. Robin X,
    3. Turck N,
    4. Hainard A, et al

    . pROC: an open-source package for R and S+ to analyze and compare ROC curves. BMC Bioinformatics 2011;12:77 doi:10.1186/1471-2105-12-77 pmid:21414208

    CrossRefPubMed