ALL Metrics
-
Views
-
Downloads
Get PDF
Get XML
Cite
Export
Track
Data Note
Revised

Prenatal brain MRI samples for development of automatic segmentation, target-recognition, and machine-learning algorithms to detect anatomical structures

[version 2; peer review: 2 not approved]
PUBLISHED 08 Sep 2017
Author details Author details
OPEN PEER REVIEW
REVIEWER STATUS

This article is included in the INCF gateway.

This article is included in the Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning gateway.

This article is included in the Data: Use and Reuse collection.

Abstract

In this data note, we present a sorted pool of fetal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) specimens. These were selected for a project seeking to further develop computer vision software called MaZda, which was originally created for magnetic resonance (MR) image analysis. A link to download the samples is provided in the manuscript herein. This data descriptor further explains how and why these fetal MRI samples were selected. Firstly, thousands of cross-sectional images obtained from fetal MRI scans were processed and sorted semi-manually with other software. We did so because a built-in “samplesort” (sorting algorithm) is missing in MaZda version 5. Additionally, the software is unfortunately lacking effective and efficient algorithms to allow automatic identification and segmentation of anatomical structures in fetal MRI samples. Hence, the final sorting steps were carried out manually via time-consuming methods (i.e., human visual detection and classifications by the gestational age of pregnancy and the rotational plane of the MR scanner). Thus, the latter correlates with the anatomical plane of the mother, rather than the hypothetical plane used to transect the fetus. In brief, we collated these fetal MRI samples in an effort to facilitate future research and discovery, especially to aid the improvement of MaZda.

Keywords

fetal MRI, automatic segmentation, algorithms, fetal brain, neuroinformatics, cybernetics, applied artificial intelligence

Revised Amendments from Version 1

We revised the first draft for clarity. Unnecessary words were omitted to make sure that the text flows from one logical point to another.

See the authors' detailed response to the review by Feng Shi
See the authors' detailed response to the review by Ivana Išgum

Introduction

Sample sorting can be useful for clinical research seeking to measure the feasibility of new ideas and to develop new technology. MaZda software (http://www.eletel.p.lodz.pl/programy/mazda/) makers and developers have shown that they are listening to their users by continuing to release updates and new versions1,2. The samples provided with the manuscript herein were collected and sorted especially for testing upcoming versions of MaZda. The aim is to continue to collaborate with MaZda software engineers in order to code target-recognition semantics and eventually build ideal algorithms for automatic segmentation of the prenatal brain. It is important to also note that it is not an easy task: to deconstruct the scientific knowledge acquired by radiologists after several hours of practice to master the skills of diagnostic imaging. Moreover, we have recently tested MaZda version 4.6 and version 5.0 and made some recommendations to the software engineers35. In reaction to our need, the MaZda team announced an upcoming version called qMaZda, being codeveloped with Weka (www.eletel.p.lodz.pl/pms/SoftwareQmazda.html; www.cs.waikato.ac.nz/ml/weka). We are expecting to see some improvements in qMaZda.

Methods

This dataset was created to improve the efficacy of MaZda. Sample collection was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Medical University of Lodz (permit number: RNN/213/13/KE). Subjects were informed with a written statement of consent for research and publication. As per agreement, personal information was removed from the original specimens.

Dataset 1.Fetal MRI data.
1.5/3T samples were manually sorted by gestational age and anatomical plane. Format: 32-bit BMP.

In terms of subject demographics and phenotypes, the background of the patients was consistent with the majority of the Polish population. In 2015, the World Health Organization (WHO) reported 2.68 million neonatal deaths (WHO fact sheet on congenital anomalies, updated September 2016: www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs370/en/). The estimate of children born with at least one congenital malformation is about 2–3% worldwide (www.who.int/genomics/anomalies/en/Chapter02.pdf). In Poland, the prevalence rate of birth defects was estimated at 52 to 53 per 1000 live births (http://www.marchofdimes.org/materials/global-report-on-birth-defects-the-hidden-toll-of-dying-and-disabled-children-full-report.pdf). Known birth defects can be detected early in pregnancy using non-invasive and/or invasive techniques69. Some can even be treated in utero10,11. There flows the rationale behind this collation of fetal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data to improve the efficacy of MaZda.

The enrolled subjects underwent MRI examination for the purpose of investigating suspected congenital, obstetrical, and placental anomalies that could not be detected by routine ultrasound and genetic amniocentesis. Volunteers who donated fetal MRI samples to create this dataset were in need of fetal, obstetrical or placental care. The criteria for inclusion and exclusion were as follows: 1) 1.5T or 3T MRI; 2) all three anatomical planes were scanned (axial, coronal, and sagittal); 3) individual cross-sectional images are “usable” (i.e., not heavily degraded by noise and artifacts, motion blur, or uncontrollable movement of fetal head); 4) visible fetal brain with no significant malformation; 5) thalamus, gray matter, white matter, and ventricles are also visible (Figure 1). The request to collect MRI scans was sent long after MRI examination was performed. Hence, MRI examination was not prescribed for the purpose of creating this dataset. After looking at 1358 MRI scans in two teleradiology databases, we manually selected 6 patients who had undergone 1.5T MRI examination at Barlicki University Hospital (Łódź, Poland) and 11 patients who had undergone 3T MRI examination at Polish Mother’s Memorial Hospital-Research Institute (Łódź, Poland).

a5fdfa3d-f9c1-45b9-8b11-dcf7bbfed0f4_figure1.gif

Figure 1. Schematic view of the clinical arrangement of the data.

Fetal magnetic resonance imaging studies were extracted from compact discs and sorted by gestational age of pregnancy and anatomical plane of the mother.

Electro-radiology technicians performed fetal MRIs, as per details provided on the prescription and hospital regulations12. Hence, we did not have control of MR scanner settings. The technicians stored the MRIs on compact discs (CDs). By default, MaZda version 4.6 and 5 are lacking an automatic samplesort (sorting algorithm) to extract images and arrange them into folders and subfolders. An option was to create a plug-in especially written for MaZda. Due to time consumption, we used other software to carry out image acquisition (Micro Dicom 0.9, Dimensions 2, Sante Dicom 4, Photoshop CS6 64-bit Extended)5. For the extraction of Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) data, we used the 64-bit portable version of Micro Dicom 0.9.1. Most CDs could be accessed with Micro Dicom or Photoshop CS6 64-bit Extended. We used the rescue feature in Sante Dicom 4 to recover the data and export them in DICOM format. Micro Dicom was the preferred samplesort, because it also allowed image selection, batch conversion, and export of DICOM files as 32-bit BMP. Sorting of the sample by MR strength (3T, 1.5T) was carried out with Dimensions 2. Clinical arrangements of the sample by gestational age of pregnancy and anatomical plane of the mother were carried out manually. The primary goal was to select images that had clearly identifiable anatomical regions such as gray matter, white matter, ventricles, and thalamus. It was not possible to complete the task with the MaZda version 5 package, as the available algorithms were lacking automatic segmentation to detect anatomical structures of the fetal brain. Additionally, details about in-depth sorting as well as MRI specifications and file formats are provided in the methods of the cited article5.

Ethics and informed consent

Permission to collect samples was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Medical University of Lodz. Written informed consent was obtained from all subjects (permit number: RNN/213/13/KE).

Data and software availability

Dataset 1: Fetal MRI data. 1.5/3T samples were manually sorted by gestational age and anatomical plane. Format: 32-bit BMP. doi, 10.5256/f1000research.10723.d15029613

MaZda Package v5 RC HG available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.17632/dkxyrzwpzs.1

Micro Dicom 0.9: www.microdicom.com/downloads.html

Dimensions 2: www.skwire.dcmembers.com/wb/pages/software/dimensions-2-folders.php

Sante Dicom 4: www.santesoft.com/downloads.html

Photoshop CS6 64-bit Extended: https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/dicom-files.html

Comments on this article Comments (1)

Version 2
VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 08 Sep 2017
Revised
Version 1
VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 31 Jan 2017
Discussion is closed on this version, please comment on the latest version above.
  • Author Response 07 Sep 2017
    Hugues Gentillon, Department of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, Barlicki University Hospital, Medical University of Łódź, Łódź, Poland
    07 Sep 2017
    Author Response
    We will make some editing changes in version 2 to improve clarity. We also wish to reiterate (emphasize again) that this paper is a "data note" (also known as data ... Continue reading
  • Discussion is closed on this version, please comment on the latest version above.
Author details Author details
Competing interests
Grant information
Copyright
Download
 
Export To
metrics
Views Downloads
F1000Research - -
PubMed Central
Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.
- -
Citations
CITE
how to cite this article
Gentillon H, Stefańczyk L, Strzelecki M and Respondek-Liberska M. Prenatal brain MRI samples for development of automatic segmentation, target-recognition, and machine-learning algorithms to detect anatomical structures [version 2; peer review: 2 not approved]. F1000Research 2017, 6:93 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.10723.2)
NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
track
receive updates on this article
Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Current Reviewer Status: ?
Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW
ApprovedThe paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approvedFundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Version 1
VERSION 1
PUBLISHED 31 Jan 2017
Views
42
Cite
Reviewer Report 03 Jul 2017
Feng Shi, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA 
Not Approved
VIEWS 42
The authors proposed a sample sorting method for fetal MR images. Below are several suggestions to potentially improve the clarity of the paper.
 
The Introduction stated that the goal of this work is to further improve the ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Shi F. Reviewer Report For: Prenatal brain MRI samples for development of automatic segmentation, target-recognition, and machine-learning algorithms to detect anatomical structures [version 2; peer review: 2 not approved]. F1000Research 2017, 6:93 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.11563.r23366)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
  • Author Response 05 Jul 2017
    Hugues Gentillon, Department of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, Barlicki University Hospital, Medical University of Łódź, Łódź, Poland
    05 Jul 2017
    Author Response
    Thank you for your comments and suggestions. Again, on F1000Research’s policies, it states that ‘Data Notes are brief descriptions of scientific datasets that include details of why and how the ... Continue reading
COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT
  • Author Response 05 Jul 2017
    Hugues Gentillon, Department of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, Barlicki University Hospital, Medical University of Łódź, Łódź, Poland
    05 Jul 2017
    Author Response
    Thank you for your comments and suggestions. Again, on F1000Research’s policies, it states that ‘Data Notes are brief descriptions of scientific datasets that include details of why and how the ... Continue reading
Views
52
Cite
Reviewer Report 31 May 2017
Ivana Išgum, Image Sciences Institute, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands 
Not Approved
VIEWS 52
To my understanding this manuscript provides a description of a data repository containing fetal MR scans and a description of an analysis software package. This is a very nice idea. However, the manuscript is currently not clearly written which hampers ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Išgum I. Reviewer Report For: Prenatal brain MRI samples for development of automatic segmentation, target-recognition, and machine-learning algorithms to detect anatomical structures [version 2; peer review: 2 not approved]. F1000Research 2017, 6:93 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.11563.r22563)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
  • Author Response 02 Jun 2017
    Hugues Gentillon, Department of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, Barlicki University Hospital, Medical University of Łódź, Łódź, Poland
    02 Jun 2017
    Author Response
    Thank you for your comments and suggestions. On F1000Research’s policies, it states that ‘Data Notes are brief descriptions of scientific datasets that include details of why and how the data ... Continue reading
COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT
  • Author Response 02 Jun 2017
    Hugues Gentillon, Department of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, Barlicki University Hospital, Medical University of Łódź, Łódź, Poland
    02 Jun 2017
    Author Response
    Thank you for your comments and suggestions. On F1000Research’s policies, it states that ‘Data Notes are brief descriptions of scientific datasets that include details of why and how the data ... Continue reading

Comments on this article Comments (1)

Version 2
VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 08 Sep 2017
Revised
Version 1
VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 31 Jan 2017
Discussion is closed on this version, please comment on the latest version above.
  • Author Response 07 Sep 2017
    Hugues Gentillon, Department of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, Barlicki University Hospital, Medical University of Łódź, Łódź, Poland
    07 Sep 2017
    Author Response
    We will make some editing changes in version 2 to improve clarity. We also wish to reiterate (emphasize again) that this paper is a "data note" (also known as data ... Continue reading
  • Discussion is closed on this version, please comment on the latest version above.
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Sign In
If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password.

The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.

Email address not valid, please try again

You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.

You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.

Code not correct, please try again
Email us for further assistance.
Server error, please try again.