Background

Automated magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) volumetry is a promising tool to evaluate regional brain volumes in dementia and especially Alzheimer's disease (AD).

Purpose

To compare automated methods and the gold standard manual segmentation in measuring regional brain volumes on MRI across healthy controls, patients with mild cognitive impairment, and patients with dementia due to AD.

Study Type

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Data Sources

MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO were searched through October 2021.

Field Strength

1.0 T, 1.5 T, or 3.0 T.

Assessment

Two review authors independently identified studies for inclusion and extracted data. Methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2).

Statistical Tests

Standardized mean differences (SMD; Hedges' g) were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis with robust variance estimation. Subgroup analyses were undertaken to explore potential sources of heterogeneity. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to examine the impact of the within-study correlation between effect estimates on the meta-analysis results.

Results

Seventeen studies provided sufficient data to evaluate the hippocampus, lateral ventricles, and parahippocampal gyrus. The pooled SMD for the hippocampus, lateral ventricles, and parahippocampal gyrus were 0.22 (95% CI −0.50 to 0.93), 0.12 (95% CI −0.13 to 0.37), and −0.48 (95% CI −1.37 to 0.41), respectively. For the hippocampal data, subgroup analyses suggested that the pooled SMD was invariant across clinical diagnosis and field strength. Subgroup analyses could not be conducted on the lateral ventricles data and the parahippocampal gyrus data due to insufficient data. The results were robust to the selected within-study correlation value.

Data Conclusion

While automated methods are generally comparable to manual segmentation for measuring hippocampal, lateral ventricle, and parahippocampal gyrus volumes, wide 95% CIs and large heterogeneity suggest that there is substantial uncontrolled variance. Thus, automated methods may be used to measure these regions in patients with AD but should be used with caution.

Evidence Level

3

Technical Efficacy

Stage 3