-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Lesion segmentation protocol #9
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
… from issue 77 on canproco repo
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is a great start @plbenveniste ! Thank you for initiating this. I would add a few visual examples of lesion segmentation, so we can all agree on how 'conservative' we want to be with our segmentations. Maybe that could be reserved to an 'example' section.
|
||
The following details the protocol for Multiple Sclerosis (MS) lesion segmentation in the spinal cord. | ||
Imaging the spinal cord is often essential to confirm the diagnosis of MS. That is because the lesions of the spinal cord are included in the McDonald diagnosis criteria, which studies dissemination in space and in time [(Thompson et al. 2018)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29275977/). While the MAGNIMS-CMSC-NAIMS working group recommends to use at least two sagittal images for MS diagnosis, still, axial imaging is mentioned as optional in international imaging guidelines [(Wattjes et al. 2021)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34139157/). | ||
For detecting MS lesions in the spinal cord, two main contrasts emerge: PSIR and STIR contrasts. New studies [(Peters et al. 2024)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38289376/)[(Fechner et al. 2019)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30679225/) showed that using PSIR contrasts improved MS lesion detection in the spinal cord. [(Fechner et al. 2019)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30679225/) showed that the PSIR contrast showed a higher signal-to-noise (SNR) ratio compared to the STIR contrast. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe my suggestion is not up-to-date, but I have doubts/questions abouts STIR sequences being frequently used for assessing MS lesions, at least in standard/basics protocols (even if mentioned in the picture showing example of of clinically used sequences for MS). From my understanding, the most useful sequence for detecting MS lesions in clinical practice is proton density (PD), but probably that changes from sites/radiologists perspective.
According to the articles, PSIR sequences seem great! However, here are some potential precisions I would address :
1-Peters and al : PSIR compared to STIR (not the best...) and T2;
2-Fechner : PSIR compared to T2 and T1C+ sequences (not compared to PD sequences...)
For detecting MS lesions in the spinal cord, two main contrasts emerge: PSIR and STIR contrasts. New studies [(Peters et al. 2024)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38289376/)[(Fechner et al. 2019)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30679225/) showed that using PSIR contrasts improved MS lesion detection in the spinal cord. [(Fechner et al. 2019)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30679225/) showed that the PSIR contrast showed a higher signal-to-noise (SNR) ratio compared to the STIR contrast. | |
For detecting MS lesions in the spinal cord, two main contrasts emerge: PSIR and STIR contrasts. New studies [(Peters et al. 2024)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38289376/)[(Fechner et al. 2019)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30679225/) showed that using PSIR contrasts improved MS lesion detection in the spinal cord. [(Fechner et al. 2019)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30679225/) showed that the PSIR contrast showed a higher signal-to-noise (SNR) ratio compared to the STIR contrast. |
lesion_segmentation_protocol.md
Outdated
|
||
## Criteria to segment MS lesions in the spinal cord: | ||
|
||
Do not segment lesions in images with too many artifacts (such as this one : https://github.com/ivadomed/canproco/issues/53#issue-1938136790). Preferably, add the image to the exclude file so that it isn’t used for model training… |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Question : in words, what would be an image considered being too artefacted? Any criteria?
Do not segment lesions in images with too many artifacts (such as this one : https://github.com/ivadomed/canproco/issues/53#issue-1938136790). Preferably, add the image to the exclude file so that it isn’t used for model training… | |
Do not segment lesions in images with too many artifacts (such as this one : https://github.com/ivadomed/canproco/issues/53#issue-1938136790). Preferably, add the image to the exclude file so that it isn’t used for model training… |
Co-authored-by: Maxime B <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Julien Cohen-Adad <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
i would also reference related initiatives-- eg
- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10406195/
- https://insightsimaging.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s13244-022-01287-4
there are other important initiatives
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
Co-authored-by: Julien Cohen-Adad <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Julien Cohen-Adad <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Julien Cohen-Adad <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Julien Cohen-Adad <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Julien Cohen-Adad <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Julien Cohen-Adad <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Julien Cohen-Adad <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Julien Cohen-Adad <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Julien Cohen-Adad <[email protected]>
Look at MSSEG challenge's public data to find cases of MS lesions in the spinal cord. The objective is to build a dataset for lesion segmentation training. |
Furthermore, it is recommended to get familiar with SCT for creating QCs and for manual correction ([SCT tutorial](https://spinalcordtoolbox.com/user_section/tutorials.html)). | ||
|
||
## Step 2: Spinal cord anatomy and lesion segmentation | ||
Before, moving on to MS lesion segmentation, trainees are advised to study the neuroanatomical structures of healthy spinal cords. Trainees should look at healthy spinal cords in MRI images of different contrasts: T2w, T1w, PSIR, STIR, MP2RAGE... A public dataset will be built for this purpose. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
SpineGeneric could be used for this purpose
## Step 2: Spinal cord anatomy and lesion segmentation | ||
Before, moving on to MS lesion segmentation, trainees are advised to study the neuroanatomical structures of healthy spinal cords. Trainees should look at healthy spinal cords in MRI images of different contrasts: T2w, T1w, PSIR, STIR, MP2RAGE... A public dataset will be built for this purpose. | ||
|
||
To learn the specificity of MS lesions, trainees should work on differentiating MS lesions from other diseases. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Which disease should be used ? NMO ?
We should also look into building this public dataset: which public data do we have ?
lesion_segmentation_protocol.md
Outdated
|
||
To learn the specificity of MS lesions, trainees should work on differentiating MS lesions from other diseases. | ||
|
||
One of the most challenging task of MS lesion segmentation is to distinguish the border of a lesion and the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). To learn where to draw the lesion border, a set of tricky examples validated by a NeuroRadioligist will be created. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Which data should be used? MSSEG data? Ask a collaborator to help us on this?
Co-authored-by: Maxime B <[email protected]>
|
||
To learn the specificity of MS lesions, trainees should work on differentiating MS lesions from other diseases. | ||
|
||
One of the most challenging tasks of MS lesion segmentation is to distinguish the border of a lesion and the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). To learn where to draw the lesion border, a set of tricky examples validated by a NeuroRadioligist will be created. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Reference the videos made by Julien during work with Michelle Chen regarding MS lesion segmentation
Referencing this lesion atlas which could be very useful in creating this lesion seg protocol: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-540-71372-2 |
This PR adds the lesion segmentation protocol which was first discussed in issue 77 from the CanProCo repo.
The lesion segmentation protocol adds an
.md
file at the base of this repository.Feedback and improvements are welcomed !