% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Wattjes:265797,
author = {Wattjes, Mike P and Huppertz, Hans-Jürgen and Mahmoudi,
Nima and Stöcklein, Sophia and Rogozinski, Sophia and
Wegner, Florian and Klietz, Martin and Apostolova, Ivayla
and Levin, Johannes and Katzdobler, Sabrina and Buhmann,
Carsten and Quattrone, Andrea and Berding, Georg and
Brendel, Matthias and Barthel, Henryk and Sabri, Osama and
Höglinger, Günter and Buchert, Ralph},
collaboration = {Initiative, Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging},
title = {{B}rain {MRI} in {P}rogressive {S}upranuclear {P}alsy with
{R}ichardson's {S}yndrome and {V}ariant {P}henotypes.},
journal = {Movement disorders},
volume = {38},
number = {10},
issn = {0885-3185},
address = {New York, NY},
publisher = {Wiley},
reportid = {DZNE-2023-01041},
pages = {1891 - 1900},
year = {2023},
abstract = {Brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is used to support
the diagnosis of progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP).
However, the value of visual descriptive, manual
planimetric, automatic volumetric MRI markers and fully
automatic categorization is unclear, particularly regarding
PSP predominance types other than Richardson's syndrome
(RS).To compare different visual reading strategies and
automatic classification of T1-weighted MRI for detection of
PSP in a typical clinical cohort including PSP-RS and
(non-RS) variant PSP (vPSP) patients.Forty-one patients (21
RS, 20 vPSP) and 46 healthy controls were included. Three
readers using three strategies performed MRI analysis:
exclusively visual reading using descriptive signs
(hummingbird, morning-glory, Mickey-Mouse), visual reading
supported by manual planimetry measures, and visual reading
supported by automatic volumetry. Fully automatic
classification was performed using a pre-trained support
vector machine (SVM) on the results of atlas-based
volumetry.All tested methods achieved higher specificity
than sensitivity. Limited sensitivity was driven to large
extent by false negative vPSP cases. Support by automatic
volumetry resulted in the highest accuracy $(75.1\%$ ±
$3.5\%)$ among the visual strategies, but performed not
better than the midbrain area $(75.9\%),$ the best single
planimetric measure. Automatic classification by SVM clearly
outperformed all other methods (accuracy, $87.4\%),$
representing the only method to provide clinically useful
sensitivity also in vPSP $(70.0\%).Fully$ automatic
classification of volumetric MRI measures using machine
learning methods outperforms visual MRI analysis without and
with planimetry or volumetry support, particularly regarding
diagnosis of vPSP, suggesting the use in settings with a
broad phenotypic PSP spectrum. © 2023 The Authors. Movement
Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of
International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.},
keywords = {Humans / Animals / Mice / Supranuclear Palsy, Progressive:
pathology / Parkinson Disease: diagnosis / Brain: diagnostic
imaging / Brain: pathology / Magnetic Resonance Imaging:
methods / Mesencephalon: pathology / hummingbird sign
(Other) / machine learning (Other) / magnetic resonance
imaging (Other) / progressive supranuclear palsy (Other) /
volumetry (Other)},
cin = {Clinical Research (Munich) / AG Levin / AG Haass},
ddc = {610},
cid = {I:(DE-2719)1111015 / I:(DE-2719)1111016 /
I:(DE-2719)1110007},
pnm = {353 - Clinical and Health Care Research (POF4-353) / 352 -
Disease Mechanisms (POF4-352)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-353 / G:(DE-HGF)POF4-352},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
pubmed = {pmid:37545102},
doi = {10.1002/mds.29527},
url = {https://pub.dzne.de/record/265797},
}