Search

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Focal cortical dysplasias are the most common resected epileptogenic lesions in children and the third most common lesion in adults, but they are often subtle and frequently overlooked on MR imaging. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether MP2RAGE-based morphometric MR imaging analysis is superior to MPRAGE-based analysis in the detection of focal cortical dysplasia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MPRAGE and MP2RAGE datasets were acquired in a consecutive series of 640 patients with epilepsy. Datasets were postprocessed using the Morphometric Analysis Program to generate morphometric z score maps such as junction, extension, and thickness images based on both MPRAGE and MP2RAGE images. Focal cortical dysplasia lesions were manually segmented in the junction images, and volumes and mean z scores of the lesions were measured. RESULTS: Of 21 focal cortical dysplasias discovered, all were clearly visible on MP2RAGE junction images, whereas 2 were not visible on MPRAGE junction images. In all except 4 patients, the volume of the focal cortical dysplasia was larger and mean lesion z scores were higher on MP2RAGE junction images compared with the MPRAGE-based images (P = .005, P = .013). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, MP2RAGE-based morphometric analysis created clearer output maps with larger lesion volumes and higher z scores than the MPRAGE-based analysis. This new approach may improve the detection of subtle, otherwise overlooked focal cortical dysplasia.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The atrophy of the caudate is considered the hallmark of HD-associated neurodegeneration and has high potential as a biomarker in structural MR imaging. This study aimed at comparing automated and manual caudate volumetry. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this cross-sectional volumetric study in 40 patients with HD and 30 healthy controls, a fully automated caudate measurement by ABV was used for the first time in HD and was directly compared with manual delineation as the generally accepted criterion standard of volumetry. RESULTS: It could be shown that both techniques were able to separate patients and controls to a similar degree. The differences between the 2 volumetric measurements ranged within the limits of agreement; the systematically lower values by manual volumetry were caused by the different assessment of the dorsal caudate tail, which is hard to delineate manually. CONCLUSIONS: ABV may be used instead of manual volumetry to quantify caudate volume loss. Additionally, the ABV technique has the advantage of being much faster, is less laborious, and is free of a subjective region-of interest definition. ABV might serve as a tool in potential future clinical trials of disease-modifying treatments in HD.