Home › Research › Hippocampus size on brain scans
Can voxel based morphometry, manual segmentation and automated segmentation equally detect hippocampal volume differences in acute depression?
Bergouignan L, Chupin M, Czechowska Y, Kinkingnéhun S, Lemogne C, Le Bastard G, Lepage M, Garnero L et al.. NeuroImage, 2008-11-21
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Context According to meta-analyses, depression is associated with a smaller hippocampus. Most magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies among middle aged acute depressed patients are based on manual segmentation of the hippocampus. Few studies used automated methods such as voxel-based morphometry (VBM) or automated segmentation that can overcome certain drawbacks of manual segmentation (essentially intra- and inter-rater variability and operator time consumption). Objective The aim of our study was to compare the sensitivity of manual segmentation, automated segmentation and VBM to detect hippocampal structural changes in middle aged acute depressed population. Method Twenty-one middle aged depressed inpatients and 21 matched controls were compared regarding their hippocampal structure using VBM with SPM5, manual segmentation and an automated segmentation algorithm. The VBM-ROI analysis was performed using two different normalization methods: the standard approach implemented in SPM5 and the most recent DARTEL algorithm. Results Using VBM-DARTEL, when corrected for multiple comparisons, significant volume differences were detected between groups in different regions and more specifically in hippocampus with ROI analyses. Whereas using standard VBM (without DARTEL), ROI analyses did not show bilateral volume between group differences. Significant hippocampal volume reductions between patients and controls were also detected using manual segmentation (-11.6% volume reduction, p<0.05) and automated segmentation (-9.7% volume reduction, p<0.05). VBM-DARTEL and automated segmentation show equal sensitivity in detecting hippocampal differences in depressed patients, while standard VBM was unable to detect hippocampal changes. Both VBM-DARTEL and automated segmentation could be used to perform large scale volumetric studies in humans. The new automated segmentation technique could further explore and detect hippocampal subpart differences that could be very useful for clarifying physiopathology of psychiatric disorders.
Key findings
- Context According to meta-analyses, depression is associated with a smaller hippocampus.
- Results Using VBM-DARTEL, when corrected for multiple comparisons, significant volume differences were detected between groups in different regions and more specifically in hippocampus with ROI analyses.
- Significant hippocampal volume reductions between patients and controls were also detected using manual segmentation (-11.6% volume reduction, p<0.05) and automated segmentation (-9.7% volume reduction, p<0.05).
Study details
- Study designmeta-analysis
- Effect size11.6%; 9.7%
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 67/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a meta-analysis pooling many studies. Scored zero for sample size and studied in people because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 39 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 67 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (NeuroImage) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 12 / 12 | A meta-analysis pooling many studies |
| Strength of evidence | 5 / 5 | Rated “high” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2009 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | A review of other studies — randomisation is not credited here |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 19071222) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 39 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 39 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 67 out of 100. |
| Total | 67 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Bergouignan, L., Chupin, M., Czechowska, Y., Kinkingnéhun, S., Lemogne, C., Le Bastard, G., et al. (2009). Can voxel based morphometry, manual segmentation and automated segmentation equally detect hippocampal volume differences in acute depression? NeuroImage. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.11.006
Vancouver
Bergouignan L, Chupin M, Czechowska Y, Kinkingnéhun S, Lemogne C, Le Bastard G, et al. Can voxel based morphometry, manual segmentation and automated segmentation equally detect hippocampal volume differences in acute depression? NeuroImage. 2009. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.11.006. PMID: 19071222.
BibTeX
@article{bergouignan2009-19071222,
author = {Bergouignan, L. and Chupin, M. and Czechowska, Y. and Kinkingnéhun, S. and Lemogne, C. and Le Bastard, G. and Lepage, M. and Garnero, L. and others},
title = {{Can voxel based morphometry, manual segmentation and automated segmentation equally detect hippocampal volume differences in acute depression?}},
journal = {NeuroImage},
year = {2009},
doi = {10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.11.006},
pmid = {19071222},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.11.006}
}
Related studies in Hippocampus size on brain scans
Also tagged “disorder”
492 studies in the library carry the topic tag “disorder”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 492 tagged studies.