부산대학교 도서관

Abstract Background Defacing has become mandatory for anonymization of brain MRI scans; however, concerns regarding data integrity were raised. Thus, we systematically evaluated the effect of different defacing procedures on automated brain atrophy estimation. Methods In total, 268 Alzheimer’s disease patients were included from ADNI, which included unaccelerated (n = 154), within-session unaccelerated repeat (n = 67) and accelerated 3D T1 imaging (n = 114). Atrophy maps were computed using the open-source software veganbagel for every original, unmodified scan and after defacing using afni_refacer, fsl_deface, mri_deface, mri_reface, PyDeface or spm_deface, and the root-mean-square error (RMSE) between z-scores was calculated. RMSE values derived from unaccelerated and unaccelerated repeat imaging served as a benchmark. Outliers were defined as RMSE > 75th percentile and by using Grubbs’s test. Results Benchmark RMSE was 0.28 ± 0.1 (range 0.12–0.58, 75th percentile 0.33). Outliers were found for unaccelerated and accelerated T1 imaging using the 75th percentile cutoff: afni_refacer (unaccelerated: 18, accelerated: 16), fsl_deface (unaccelerated: 4, accelerated: 18), mri_deface (unaccelerated: 0, accelerated: 15), mri_reface (unaccelerated: 0, accelerated: 2) and spm_deface (unaccelerated: 0, accelerated: 7). PyDeface performed best with no outliers (unaccelerated mean RMSE 0.08 ± 0.05, accelerated mean RMSE 0.07 ± 0.05). The following outliers were found according to Grubbs’s test: afni_refacer (unaccelerated: 16, accelerated: 13), fsl_deface (unaccelerated: 10, accelerated: 21), mri_deface (unaccelerated: 7, accelerated: 20), mri_reface (unaccelerated: 7, accelerated: 6), PyDeface (unaccelerated: 5, accelerated: 8) and spm_deface (unaccelerated: 10, accelerated: 12). Conclusion Most defacing approaches have an impact on atrophy estimation, especially in accelerated 3D T1 imaging. Only PyDeface showed good results with negligible impact on atrophy estimation.