Automatic quantification of changes in the volume of brain structures

  • Guillaume Calmon
  • Neil Roberts
  • Paul Eldridge
  • Jean-Philippe Thirion
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1496)


We present an automatic technique to quantify changes in the volume of cerebral structures. The only manual step is a segmentation of the structure of interest in the first image. The image analysis comprises: i) a precise rigid co-registration of the time series of images, ii) the computation of residual deformations betweens pairs of images. Automatic quantification can be obtained either by propagation of the segmentation or by integration of the deformation field. These approaches have been applied to monitor brain atrophy in one patient and to investigate a ‘mass effect’ in tissue surrounding a brain tumour in four patients undergoing radiotherapy. Segmentation propagation gave good results for quantifying contrasted structures such as ventricles or well-circumscribed tumours; however, integration of the deformations may be more appropriate to quantify diffusive tumours.


Lateral Ventricle Mass Effect Deformation Field Primary Progressive Aphasia Segmentation Propagation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    N. Roberts, A. S. Garden, L. M. Cruz-Orive, G. H. Whitehouse, and R. H. T. Edwards. Estimation of fetal volume by MR imaging and stereology. Bristish Journal of Radiology (BJR), 67:1067–1077, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Joseph V. Hajnal, Nadeem Saeed, Angela Oatridge, Elaime J. Williams, Ian R. Young, and Graeme M. Bydder. Detection of subtle brain changes using subvoxel registration and subtraction of serial MR images. Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography (JCAT), 19(5):677–691, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Louis Lemieux. The segmentation and estimation of noise in difference images of co-registered MRI scan pairs. In Medical Image Understanding and Analysis (MIUA ’97), Oxford, UK, July 1997.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Peter A. Freeborough, Roger P. Woods, and Nick C. Fox. Accurate registration of serial 3D MR brain images and its application to visualizing change in neurodegenerative disorders. Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography (JCAT), 20(6):1012–1022, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    D. Lemoine, C. Barillot, B. Gibaud, and E. Pasqualini. An anatomical-based 3D registration system of multimodality and atlas data in neurosurgery. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science, volume 511, pages 154–164, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jean Talairach and Pierre Tournoux. Referentially oriented cerebral MRI anatomy. Thieme Medical Publishers, New York, United-States, 1993.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    D. Louis Collins, Peter Neelin, Terrence M. Peters, and Allan C. Evans. Automatic 3D intersubject registration of MR volumetric data in standardized Talairach space. Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography (JCAT), 18(2):192–205, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fred L. Bookstein. Principal warps: Thin-plate splines and the decomposition of deformations. IEEE Transactions in Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (PAMI), 11(6):567–585, June 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. Declerck, G. Subsol, Jean-Philippe Thirion, and N. Ayache. Automatic retrieval of anatomical structures in 3D medical images. In Computer Vision, Virtual Reality and Robotics in Medicine, CVRMed ’95, pages 153–162, Nice, France, April 1995.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    R. Bajcsy and S. Kovačič. Multiresolution Elastic Matching. Computer Vision, Graphics and Image Processing, 46:1–21, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jim C. Gee, Martin Reivich, and Ruzena Bajcsy. Elastically deforming 3D atlas to match anatomical brain images. Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography (JCAT), 17(2):225–236, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    G. E. Christensen, R. D. Rabbitt, and M. I. Miller. 3D brain mapping using a deformable neuroanatomy. Physics in Medicine and Biology, 39:609–618, 1994.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jean-Philippe Thirion. New feature points based on geometric invariants for 3D image registration. International Journal of Computer Vision, 18(2):121–137, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jean-Philippe Thirion. Non-rigid matching using demons. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, San Francisco, California USA, June 1996.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Morten Bro-Nielsen and Claus Gramkow. Fast fluid registration of medical images. In Visualization in Biomedical Computing (VBC’96), pages 267–276, Hamburg, Germany, September 1996.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jean-Philippe Thirion and Guillaume Calmon. Measuring lesion growth from 3D medical images. In IEEE Non Rigid and Articulated Motion Workshop in conjunction with CVPR’97, pages 112–119, Puerto Rico, USA, June 1997. also available as technical report RR-3101 at Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Guillaume Calmon
    • 1
  • Neil Roberts
    • 1
  • Paul Eldridge
    • 2
  • Jean-Philippe Thirion
    • 3
  1. 1.Magnetic Resonance and Image Analysis Research Centre (MARIARC)University of LiverpoolUK
  2. 2.Walton Centre for Neurology and NeurosurgeryLiverpoolUK
  3. 3.Épidaure ProjectInstitut National de Recherche en Informatique et en Automatique (INRIA)Sophia AntipolisFrance

Personalised recommendations