2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.11.017
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Robust skull stripping using multiple MR image contrasts insensitive to pathology

Abstract: Automatic skull-stripping or brain extraction of magnetic resonance (MR) images is often a fundamental step in many neuroimage processing pipelines. The accuracy of subsequent image processing relies on the accuracy of the skull-stripping. Although many automated stripping methods have been proposed in the past, it is still an active area of research particularly in the context of brain pathology. Most stripping methods are validated on T1-w MR images of normal brains, especially because high resolution T1-w s… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
69
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 93 publications
(71 citation statements)
references
References 68 publications
(102 reference statements)
1
69
1
Order By: Relevance
“…FLAIR and T 2 -w images were rigidly registered [16] to the MPRAGE. Then for every subject, the MPRAGE was stripped [17] and the same brainmask was applied to the other contrasts. All of the stripped images were corrected for any intensity inhomogeneity [18].…”
Section: Datasetmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…FLAIR and T 2 -w images were rigidly registered [16] to the MPRAGE. Then for every subject, the MPRAGE was stripped [17] and the same brainmask was applied to the other contrasts. All of the stripped images were corrected for any intensity inhomogeneity [18].…”
Section: Datasetmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All data was acquired on a Siemens Biograph mMR 3T imaging platform. The five patients’ T1-w MRI first underwent standard neuroimaging preprocessing, which includes inhomogeneity correction, 12 skull stripping, 13 and affine registration to an MNI atlas at 0.8 mm isotropic resolution. To quantify the performance of our proposed method, we use two metrics that measure surface distance between the automatic result and manual delineation: Hausdorff distance (HD) 14 and mean surface distance (MSD).…”
Section: Experiments and Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The images were preprocessed using standard preprocessing procedures: Resampling to 0.8×0.8×0.8 mm 3 voxel size, correction for signal non-uniformity 13 in the T1-w and T2-w images (see subsection 2.3 for why FLAIR was omitted), rigid registration to the MNI-ICBM152 template, 14 and skull removal. 15…”
Section: Data and Preprocessingmentioning
confidence: 99%