Cargando…

A comparison of intracranial volume estimation methods and their cross‐sectional and longitudinal associations with age

Intracranial volume (ICV) is frequently used in volumetric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies, both as a covariate and as a variable of interest. Findings of associations between ICV and age have varied, potentially due to differences in ICV estimation methods. Here, we compared five commonly...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nerland, Stener, Stokkan, Therese S., Jørgensen, Kjetil N., Wortinger, Laura A., Richard, Geneviève, Beck, Dani, van der Meer, Dennis, Westlye, Lars T., Andreassen, Ole A., Agartz, Ingrid, Barth, Claudia
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9491281/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35708198
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hbm.25978
_version_ 1784793250212610048
author Nerland, Stener
Stokkan, Therese S.
Jørgensen, Kjetil N.
Wortinger, Laura A.
Richard, Geneviève
Beck, Dani
van der Meer, Dennis
Westlye, Lars T.
Andreassen, Ole A.
Agartz, Ingrid
Barth, Claudia
author_facet Nerland, Stener
Stokkan, Therese S.
Jørgensen, Kjetil N.
Wortinger, Laura A.
Richard, Geneviève
Beck, Dani
van der Meer, Dennis
Westlye, Lars T.
Andreassen, Ole A.
Agartz, Ingrid
Barth, Claudia
author_sort Nerland, Stener
collection PubMed
description Intracranial volume (ICV) is frequently used in volumetric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies, both as a covariate and as a variable of interest. Findings of associations between ICV and age have varied, potentially due to differences in ICV estimation methods. Here, we compared five commonly used ICV estimation methods and their associations with age. T1‐weighted cross‐sectional MRI data was included for 651 healthy individuals recruited through the NORMENT Centre (mean age = 46.1 years, range = 12.0–85.8 years) and 2410 healthy individuals recruited through the UK Biobank study (UKB, mean age = 63.2 years, range = 47.0–80.3 years), where longitudinal data was also available. ICV was estimated with FreeSurfer (eTIV and sbTIV), SPM12, CAT12, and FSL. We found overall high correlations across ICV estimation method, with the lowest observed correlations between FSL and eTIV (r = .87) and between FSL and CAT12 (r = .89). Widespread proportional bias was found, indicating that the agreement between methods varied as a function of head size. Body weight, age, sex, and mean ICV across methods explained the most variance in the differences between ICV estimation methods, indicating possible confounding for some estimation methods. We found both positive and negative cross‐sectional associations with age, depending on dataset and ICV estimation method. Longitudinal ICV reductions were found for all ICV estimation methods, with annual percentage change ranging from −0.293% to −0.416%. This convergence of longitudinal results across ICV estimation methods offers strong evidence for age‐related ICV reductions in mid‐ to late adulthood.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9491281
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94912812022-09-30 A comparison of intracranial volume estimation methods and their cross‐sectional and longitudinal associations with age Nerland, Stener Stokkan, Therese S. Jørgensen, Kjetil N. Wortinger, Laura A. Richard, Geneviève Beck, Dani van der Meer, Dennis Westlye, Lars T. Andreassen, Ole A. Agartz, Ingrid Barth, Claudia Hum Brain Mapp Research Articles Intracranial volume (ICV) is frequently used in volumetric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies, both as a covariate and as a variable of interest. Findings of associations between ICV and age have varied, potentially due to differences in ICV estimation methods. Here, we compared five commonly used ICV estimation methods and their associations with age. T1‐weighted cross‐sectional MRI data was included for 651 healthy individuals recruited through the NORMENT Centre (mean age = 46.1 years, range = 12.0–85.8 years) and 2410 healthy individuals recruited through the UK Biobank study (UKB, mean age = 63.2 years, range = 47.0–80.3 years), where longitudinal data was also available. ICV was estimated with FreeSurfer (eTIV and sbTIV), SPM12, CAT12, and FSL. We found overall high correlations across ICV estimation method, with the lowest observed correlations between FSL and eTIV (r = .87) and between FSL and CAT12 (r = .89). Widespread proportional bias was found, indicating that the agreement between methods varied as a function of head size. Body weight, age, sex, and mean ICV across methods explained the most variance in the differences between ICV estimation methods, indicating possible confounding for some estimation methods. We found both positive and negative cross‐sectional associations with age, depending on dataset and ICV estimation method. Longitudinal ICV reductions were found for all ICV estimation methods, with annual percentage change ranging from −0.293% to −0.416%. This convergence of longitudinal results across ICV estimation methods offers strong evidence for age‐related ICV reductions in mid‐ to late adulthood. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2022-06-16 /pmc/articles/PMC9491281/ /pubmed/35708198 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hbm.25978 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Human Brain Mapping published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Research Articles
Nerland, Stener
Stokkan, Therese S.
Jørgensen, Kjetil N.
Wortinger, Laura A.
Richard, Geneviève
Beck, Dani
van der Meer, Dennis
Westlye, Lars T.
Andreassen, Ole A.
Agartz, Ingrid
Barth, Claudia
A comparison of intracranial volume estimation methods and their cross‐sectional and longitudinal associations with age
title A comparison of intracranial volume estimation methods and their cross‐sectional and longitudinal associations with age
title_full A comparison of intracranial volume estimation methods and their cross‐sectional and longitudinal associations with age
title_fullStr A comparison of intracranial volume estimation methods and their cross‐sectional and longitudinal associations with age
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of intracranial volume estimation methods and their cross‐sectional and longitudinal associations with age
title_short A comparison of intracranial volume estimation methods and their cross‐sectional and longitudinal associations with age
title_sort comparison of intracranial volume estimation methods and their cross‐sectional and longitudinal associations with age
topic Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9491281/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35708198
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hbm.25978
work_keys_str_mv AT nerlandstener acomparisonofintracranialvolumeestimationmethodsandtheircrosssectionalandlongitudinalassociationswithage
AT stokkanthereses acomparisonofintracranialvolumeestimationmethodsandtheircrosssectionalandlongitudinalassociationswithage
AT jørgensenkjetiln acomparisonofintracranialvolumeestimationmethodsandtheircrosssectionalandlongitudinalassociationswithage
AT wortingerlauraa acomparisonofintracranialvolumeestimationmethodsandtheircrosssectionalandlongitudinalassociationswithage
AT richardgenevieve acomparisonofintracranialvolumeestimationmethodsandtheircrosssectionalandlongitudinalassociationswithage
AT beckdani acomparisonofintracranialvolumeestimationmethodsandtheircrosssectionalandlongitudinalassociationswithage
AT vandermeerdennis acomparisonofintracranialvolumeestimationmethodsandtheircrosssectionalandlongitudinalassociationswithage
AT westlyelarst acomparisonofintracranialvolumeestimationmethodsandtheircrosssectionalandlongitudinalassociationswithage
AT andreassenolea acomparisonofintracranialvolumeestimationmethodsandtheircrosssectionalandlongitudinalassociationswithage
AT agartzingrid acomparisonofintracranialvolumeestimationmethodsandtheircrosssectionalandlongitudinalassociationswithage
AT barthclaudia acomparisonofintracranialvolumeestimationmethodsandtheircrosssectionalandlongitudinalassociationswithage
AT nerlandstener comparisonofintracranialvolumeestimationmethodsandtheircrosssectionalandlongitudinalassociationswithage
AT stokkanthereses comparisonofintracranialvolumeestimationmethodsandtheircrosssectionalandlongitudinalassociationswithage
AT jørgensenkjetiln comparisonofintracranialvolumeestimationmethodsandtheircrosssectionalandlongitudinalassociationswithage
AT wortingerlauraa comparisonofintracranialvolumeestimationmethodsandtheircrosssectionalandlongitudinalassociationswithage
AT richardgenevieve comparisonofintracranialvolumeestimationmethodsandtheircrosssectionalandlongitudinalassociationswithage
AT beckdani comparisonofintracranialvolumeestimationmethodsandtheircrosssectionalandlongitudinalassociationswithage
AT vandermeerdennis comparisonofintracranialvolumeestimationmethodsandtheircrosssectionalandlongitudinalassociationswithage
AT westlyelarst comparisonofintracranialvolumeestimationmethodsandtheircrosssectionalandlongitudinalassociationswithage
AT andreassenolea comparisonofintracranialvolumeestimationmethodsandtheircrosssectionalandlongitudinalassociationswithage
AT agartzingrid comparisonofintracranialvolumeestimationmethodsandtheircrosssectionalandlongitudinalassociationswithage
AT barthclaudia comparisonofintracranialvolumeestimationmethodsandtheircrosssectionalandlongitudinalassociationswithage