4.7 Article

QuickNAT: A fully convolutional network for quick and accurate segmentation of neuroanatomy

Journal

NEUROIMAGE
Volume 186, Issue -, Pages 713-727

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.11.042

Keywords

Brain segmentation; Fully convolutional neural networks; Deep learning; MRI T1 scans

Funding

  1. Bavarian State Ministry of Education, Science and the Arts in the framework of the Center Digitisation.Bavaria (ZD.B)
  2. Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) (National Institutes of Health) [U01 AG024904]
  3. DOD ADNI (Department of Defense) [W81XWH-12-2-0012]
  4. National Institute on Aging
  5. National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering
  6. Canadian Institutes of Health Research

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Whole brain segmentation from structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a prerequisite for most morphological analyses, but is computationally intense and can therefore delay the availability of image markers after scan acquisition. We introduce QuickNAT, a fully convolutional, densely connected neural network that segments a MRI brain scan in 20 s. To enable training of the complex network with millions of learnable parameters using limited annotated data, we propose to first pre-train on auxiliary labels created from existing segmentation software. Subsequently, the pre-trained model is fine-tuned on manual labels to rectify errors in auxiliary labels. With this learning strategy, we are able to use large neuroimaging repositories without manual annotations for training. In an extensive set of evaluations on eight datasets that cover a wide age range, pathology, and different scanners, we demonstrate that QuickNAT achieves superior segmentation accuracy and reliability in comparison to state-of-the-art methods, while being orders of magnitude faster. The speed up facilitates processing of large data repositories and supports translation of imaging biomarkers by making them available within seconds for fast clinical decision making.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available