Paper detail

Robust Automatic Whole Brain Extraction on Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Brain Tumor Patients using Dense-Vnet

Whole brain extraction, also known as skull stripping, is a process in neuroimaging in which non-brain tissue such as skull, eyeballs, skin, etc. are removed from neuroimages. Skull striping is a preliminary step in presurgical planning, cortical reconstruction, and automatic tumor segmentation. Despite a plethora of skull stripping approaches in the literature, few are sufficiently accurate for processing pathology-presenting MRIs, especially MRIs with brain tumors. In this work we propose a deep learning approach for skull striping common MRI sequences in oncology such as T1-weighted with gadolinium contrast (T1Gd) and T2-weighted fluid attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) in patients with brain tumors. We automatically created gray matter, white matter, and CSF probability masks using SPM12 software and merged the masks into one for a final whole-brain mask for model training. Dice agreement, sensitivity, and specificity of the model (referred herein as DeepBrain) was tested against manual brain masks. To assess data efficiency, we retrained our models using progressively fewer training data examples and calculated average dice scores on the test set for the models trained in each round. Further, we tested our model against MRI of healthy brains from the LBP40A dataset. Overall, DeepBrain yielded an average dice score of 94.5%, sensitivity of 96.4%, and specificity of 98.5% on brain tumor data. For healthy brains, model performance improved to a dice score of 96.2%, sensitivity of 96.6% and specificity of 99.2%. The data efficiency experiment showed that, for this specific task, comparable levels of accuracy could have been achieved with as few as 50 training samples. In conclusion, this study demonstrated that a deep learning model trained on minimally processed automatically-generated labels can generate more accurate brain masks on MRI of brain tumor patients within seconds.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access8 authors3 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.