Evolution of white matter hyperintensity segmentation methods and implementation over the past two decades; an incomplete shift towards deep learning
Maryam Rahmani,Donna Dierker,Lauren Yaeger,Andrew Saykin,Patrick H Luckett,Andrei G Vlassenko,Christopher Owens,Hussain Jafri,Kyle Womack,Jurgen Fripp,Ying Xia,Duygu Tosun,Tammie L S Benzinger,Colin L Masters,Jin-Moo Lee,John C Morris,Manu S Goyal,Jeremy F Strain,ADOPIC, ADNI Investigators,Walter Kukull,Michael Weiner,Biostats, Database and Bioinformatics,Samantha Burnham,Tim James CoxDoecke,Victor Fedyashov,Rosita Shishegar,Chengjie Xiong,Daniel Marcus,Parnesh Raniga,Shenpeng Li,Cognition,Andrew Aschenbrenner,Jason Hassenstab,Yen Ying Lim,Paul Maruff,Hamid Sohrabi,Jo Robertson,Shaun Markovic,Imaging,Pierrick Bourgeat,Vincent Doré,Clifford Jack Mayo,Parinaz Mussoumzadeh,Chris Rowe,Victor Villemagne,CSF and Blood,Randy Bateman,Chris Fowler,Qiao-Xin Li,Ralph Martins,Suzanne Schindler,Les Shaw,Genetics,Carlos Cruchaga,Oscar Harari,Simon Laws,Tenielle Porter,Eleanor O'Brien,Neuropathology,Richard Perrin,NACC,DIAN,Eric McDade,Cerebrovascular Disease (CVD) Risk,Clifford Jack,John Morris,Nawaf Yassi,Hippocampal Sclerosis (HS-TDP43) Risk,Blaine Roberts,Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning,Benjamin Goudey
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11682-024-00902-w
Abstract:This systematic review examines the prevalence, underlying mechanisms, cohort characteristics, evaluation criteria, and cohort types in white matter hyperintensity (WMH) pipeline and implementation literature spanning the last two decades. Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, we categorized WMH segmentation tools based on their methodologies from January 1, 2000, to November 18, 2022. Inclusion criteria involved articles using openly available techniques with detailed descriptions, focusing on WMH as a primary outcome. Our analysis identified 1007 visual rating scales, 118 pipeline development articles, and 509 implementation articles. These studies predominantly explored aging, dementia, psychiatric disorders, and small vessel disease, with aging and dementia being the most prevalent cohorts. Deep learning emerged as the most frequently developed segmentation technique, indicative of a heightened scrutiny in new technique development over the past two decades. We illustrate observed patterns and discrepancies between published and implemented WMH techniques. Despite increasingly sophisticated quantitative segmentation options, visual rating scales persist, with the SPM technique being the most utilized among quantitative methods and potentially serving as a reference standard for newer techniques. Our findings highlight the need for future standards in WMH segmentation, and we provide recommendations based on these observations.