Naga Karthik Enamundram

Morphometric measures derived from spinal cord segmentations can serve as diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers in neurological diseases and injuries affecting the spinal cord. While robust, automatic segmentation methods to a wide variety of contrasts and pathologies have been developed over the past few years, whether their predictions are stable as the model is updated using new datasets has not been assessed. This is particularly important for deriving normative values from healthy participants. In this study, we present a spinal cord segmentation model trained on a multisite (n=75) dataset, including 9 different MRI contrasts and several spinal cord pathologies. We also introduce a lifelong learning framework to automatically monitor the morphometric drift as the model is updated using additional datasets. The framework is triggered by an automatic GitHub Actions workflow every time a new model is created, recording the morphometric values derived from the model’s predictions over time. As a real-world application of the proposed framework, we employed the spinal cord segmentation model to update a recently-introduced normative database of healthy participants containing commonly used measures of spinal cord morphometry. Results showed that: (i) our model outperforms previous versions and pathology-specific models on challenging lumbar spinal cord cases, achieving an average Dice score of 0.95 ± 0.03; (ii) the automatic workflow for monitoring morphometric drift provides a quick feedback loop for developing future segmentation models; and (iii) the scaling factor required to update the database of morphometric measures is nearly constant among slices across the given vertebral levels, showing minimum drift between the current and previous versions of the model monitored by the framework. The model is freely available in Spinal Cord Toolbox v7.0.

Deep learning models have achieved remarkable success in segmenting brain white matter lesions in multiple sclerosis (MS), becoming integral to both research and clinical workflows. While brain lesions have gained significant attention in MS research, the involvement of spinal cord lesions in MS is relatively understudied. This is largely owing to the variability in spinal cord magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) acquisition protocols, high individual anatomical differences, the complex morphology and size of spinal cord lesions, and lastly, the scarcity of labeled datasets required to develop robust segmentation tools. As a result, automatic segmentation of spinal cord MS lesions remains a significant challenge. Although some segmentation tools exist for spinal cord lesions, most have been developed using sagittal T2-weighted (T2w) sequences primarily focusing on cervical spines. With the growing importance of spinal cord imaging in MS, axial T2w scans are becoming increasingly relevant due to their superior sensitivity in detecting lesions compared to sagittal acquisition protocols. However, most existing segmentation methods struggle to effectively generalize to axial sequences due to differences in image characteristics caused by the highly anisotropic spinal cord scans. To address these challenges, we developed a robust, open-source lesion segmentation tool tailored specifically for axial T2w scans covering the whole spinal cord. We investigated key factors influencing lesion segmentation, including the impact of stitching together individually acquired spinal regions, straightening the spinal cord, and comparing the effectiveness of 2D and 3D convolutional neural networks (CNNs). Drawing on these insights, we trained a multi-center model using an extensive dataset of 582 MS patients, resulting in a dataset comprising an entirety of 2,167 scans. We empirically evaluated the model’s segmentation performance across various spinal segments for lesions with varying sizes. Our model significantly outperforms the current state-of-the-art methods, providing consistent segmentation across cervical, thoracic, and lumbar regions. To support the broader research community, we integrate our model into the widely-used Spinal Cord Toolbox (v7.0 and above), making it accessible via the command sct_deepseg lesion_ms_axial_t2 -i <path-to-image.nii.gz>.

Spinal cord segmentation is clinically relevant and is notably used to compute spinal cord cross-sectional area (CSA) for the diagnosis and monitoring of cord compression or neurodegenerative diseases such as multiple sclerosis. While several semi and automatic methods exist, one key limitation remains: the segmentation depends on the MRI contrast, resulting in different CSA across contrasts. This is partly due to the varying appearance of the boundary between the spinal cord and the cerebrospinal fluid that depends on the sequence and acquisition parameters. This contrast-sensitive CSA adds variability in multi-center studies where protocols can vary, reducing the sensitivity to detect subtle atrophies. Moreover, existing methods enhance the CSA variability by training one model per contrast, while also producing binary masks that do not account for partial volume effects. In this work, we present a deep learning-based method that produces soft segmentations of the spinal cord that are stable across MRI contrasts. Using the Spine Generic Public Database of healthy participants (n=267; contrasts=6), we first generated participant-wise soft ground truth (GT) by averaging the binary segmentations across all 6 contrasts. These soft GT, along with aggressive data augmentation and a regression-based loss function, were then used to train a U-Net model for spinal cord segmentation. We evaluated our model against state-of-the-art methods and performed ablation studies involving different GT mask types, loss functions, contrast-specific models and domain generalization methods. Our results show that using the soft average segmentations along with a regression loss function reduces CSA variability (p<0.05, Wilcoxon signed-rank test). The proposed spinal cord segmentation model generalizes better than the state-of-the-art contrast-specific methods amongst unseen datasets, vendors, contrasts, and pathologies (compression, lesions), while accounting for partial volume effects. Our model is integrated into the Spinal Cord Toolbox (v6.2 and higher).

Purpose: To develop a deep learning tool for the automatic segmentation of the spinal cord and intramedullary lesions in spinal cord injury (SCI) on T2-weighted MRI scans. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included MRI data acquired between July 2002 and February 2023. The data consisted of T2-weighted MRI scans acquired using different scanner manufacturers with various image resolutions (isotropic and anisotropic) and orientations (axial and sagittal). Patients had different lesion etiologies (traumatic, ischemic, and hemorrhagic) and lesion locations across the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine. A deep learning model, SCIseg (which is open source and accessible through the Spinal Cord Toolbox, version 6.2 and above), was trained in a three-phase process involving active learning for the automatic segmentation of intramedullary SCI lesions and the spinal cord. The segmentations from the proposed model were visually and quantitatively compared with those from three other open-source methods (PropSeg, DeepSeg, and contrast-agnostic, all part of the Spinal Cord Toolbox). The Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to compare quantitative MRI biomarkers of SCI (lesion volume, lesion length, and maximal axial damage ratio) derived from the manual reference standard lesion masks and biomarkers obtained automatically with SCIseg segmentations. Results: The study included 191 patients with SCI (mean age, 48.1 years ± 17.9 [SD]; 142 [74%] male patients). SCIseg achieved a mean Dice score of 0.92 ± 0.07 and 0.61 ± 0.27 for spinal cord and SCI lesion segmentation, respectively. There was no evidence of a difference between lesion length (P = .42) and maximal axial damage ratio (P = .16) computed from manually annotated lesions and the lesion segmentations obtained using SCIseg. Conclusion: SCIseg accurately segmented intramedullary lesions on a diverse dataset of T2-weighted MRI scans and automatically extracted clinically relevant lesion characteristics. Keywords: Spinal Cord, Trauma, Segmentation, MR Imaging, Supervised Learning, Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) Published under a CC BY 4.0 license.

Medical tasks are prone to inter-rater variability due to multiple factors such as image quality, professional experience and training, or guideline clarity. Training deep learning networks with annotations from multiple raters is a common practice that mitigates the model’s bias towards a single expert. Reliable models generating calibrated outputs and reflecting the inter-rater disagreement are key to the integration of artificial intelligence in clinical practice. Various methods exist to take into account different expert labels. We focus on comparing three label fusion methods: STAPLE, average of the rater’s segmentation, and random sampling of each rater’s segmentation during training. Each label fusion method is studied using both the conventional training framework and the recently published SoftSeg framework that limits information loss by treating the segmentation task as a regression. Our results, across 10 data splittings on two public datasets (spinal cord gray matter challenge, and multiple sclerosis brain lesion segmentation), indicate that SoftSeg models, regardless of the ground truth fusion method, had better calibration and preservation of the inter-rater rater variability compared with their conventional counterparts without impacting the segmentation performance. Conventional models, i.e., trained with a Dice loss, with binary inputs, and sigmoid/softmax final activate, were overconfident and underestimated the uncertainty associated with inter-rater variability. Conversely, fusing labels by averaging with the SoftSeg framework led to underconfident outputs and overestimation of the rater disagreement. In terms of segmentation performance, the best label fusion method was different for the two datasets studied, indicating this parameter might be task-dependent. However, SoftSeg had segmentation performance systematically superior or equal to the conventionally trained models and had the best calibration and preservation of the inter-rater variability. SoftSeg has a low computational cost and performed similarly in terms of uncertainty to ensembles which require multiple models and forward passes. Our code is available at https://ivadomed.org.