White matter (WM) abnormalities, such as atrophy and hyperintensities (WMH), can be accessed via magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) after pediatric traumatic brain injury (TBI). Several methods are available to classify WM abnormalities (i.e., total WM volumes and WMHs), but automated and manual volumes and clinical ratings have yet to be compared in pediatric TBI. In addition, WM integrity has been associated reliably with processing speed. Consequently, methods of assessing WM integrity should relate to processing speed to have clinical application. This study had two goals: (1) to compare Scheltens rating scale, manual tracing, FreeSurfer, and NeuroQuant® methods of assessing WM abnormalities, and (2) to relate WM methods to processing speed scores. We report findings from the Social Outcomes of Brain Injury in Kids (SOBIK) study, a multi-center study of 60 children with chronic TBI (65% male) from ages 8–13. Scheltens WMH ratings had good to excellent agreement with WMH volumes for both NeuroQuant (ICC = 0.62; r = 0.29, p = 0.005) and manual tracing (ICC = 0.82; r = 0.50, p = 0.000). NeuroQuant WMH volumes did not correlate with manually traced WMH volumes (r = 0.12, p = 0.21) and had poor agreement (ICC = 0.24). NeuroQuant and FreeSurfer total WM volumes correlated (r = 0.38, p = 0.004) and had fair agreement (ICC = 0.52). The WMH assessment methods, both ratings and volumes, were associated with processing speed scores. In contrast, total WM volume was not related to processing speed. Measures of WMH may hold clinical utility for predicting cognitive functioning after pediatric TBI.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
EisenmengerL. and AnzaiY. (2016). Computed tomography in pediatric traumatic brain injury: Who needs it and how is it scored?. J. Pediatr. Neuroradiol. 5, 13–19.
2.
BiglerE.D., JantzP.B., FarrerT.J., AbildskovT.J., DennisM., GerhardtC.A., RubinK.H., StancinT., TaylorH.G., VannattaK., and YeatesK.O. (2015). Day of injury CT and late MRI findings: cognitive outcome in a paediatric sample with complicated mild traumatic brain injury. Brain Inj. 29, 1062–1070.
3.
ShentonM.E., HamodaH.M., SchneidermanJ.S., BouixS., PasternakO., RathiY., VuM.A., PurohitM.P., HelmerK., KoerteI., LinA.P., WestinC.F., KikinisR., KubickiM., SternR.A., and ZafonteR. (2012). A review of magnetic resonance imaging and diffusion tensor imaging findings in mild traumatic brain injury. Brain Imaging Behav. 6, 137–192.
4.
MurphyS. and DuhaimeA.C. (2016). The role of neuroimaging in the diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of traumatic brain injury in children. J. Pediatr. Neuroradiol. 5, 2–6.
5.
PappK.V., KaplanR.F., SpringateB., MoscufoN., WakefieldD.B., GuttmannC.R., and WolfsonL. (2014). Processing speed in normal aging: effects of white matter hyperintensities and hippocampal volume loss. Neuropsychol. Dev. Cogn. B Aging Neuropsychol. Cogn. 21, 197–213.
6.
WuM., RosanoC., ButtersM., WhyteE., NableM., CrooksR., MeltzerC.C., C.F., III, and AizensteinH.J. (2006). A fully automatic method for quantifying and localizing white matter hyperintensities on MR images. Psychiatry Res. 148, 133–142.
7.
ZhanW., ZhangY., MuellerS.G., LorenzenP., HadjidemetriouS., SchuffN., and WeinerM.W. (2009). Characterization of white matter degeneration in elderly subjects by magnetic resonance diffusion and FLAIR imaging correlation. Neuroimage, 47, Suppl 2, T58–T65.
8.
WrightR.M. and RameshK.T. (2012). An axonal strain injury criterion for traumatic brain injury. Biomech. Model Mechanobiol. 11, 245–260.
9.
BesenskiN. (2002). Traumatic injuries: imaging of head injuries. Eur. Radiol. 12, 1237–1252.
10.
ArmstrongR.C., MierzwaA.J., MarionC.M., and SullivanG.M. (2016). White matter involvement after TBI: clues to axon and myelin repair capacity. Exp. Neurol. 275, 328–333.
11.
KönigsM., PouwelsP.J., Ernest van HeurnL.W., BakxR., Jeroen VermeulenR., GoslingsJ.C., Carel GoslingsJ, Poll-TheeB.T., van der WeesM., Catsman-BerrevoetsC.E., and OosterlaanJ. (2018). Relevance of neuroimaging for neurocognitive and behavioral outcome after pediatric traumatic brain injury. Brain Imaging Behav. 12, 12–43.
12.
FarbotaK.D., SodhiA., BendlinB.B., McLarenD.G., XuG., RowleyH.A., and JohnsonS.C. (2012). Longitudinal volumetric changes following traumatic brain injury: a tensor-based morphometry study. J. Int. Neuropsychol. Soc. 18, 1006–1018.
13.
RiedyG., SenseneyJ.S., LiuW., OllingerJ., ShamE., KrapivaP., PatelJ.B., SmithA., YehP.H., GranerJ., NathanD., CabanJ., FrenchL.M., HarperJ., EskayV., MorissetteJ., and OakesT.R. (2016). Findings from structural MR imaging in military traumatic brain injury. Radiology, 279, 207–215.
14.
BiglerE.D. (2013). Neuroinflammation and the dynamic lesion in traumatic brain injury. Brain, 136, 9–11.
15.
ScheltensP., BarkhofF., LeysD., PruvoJ., NautaJ.J., VermerschP., SteinlingM., and ValkJ. (1993). A semiquantitative rating scale for the assessment of signal hyperintensities on magnetic resonance imaging. J. Neurol. Sci. 114, 7–12.
16.
AmbarkiK., WahlinA., BirganderR., EklundA., and MalmJ. (2011). MR imaging of brain volumes: evaluation of a fully automatic software. AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol. 32, 408–412.
17.
GrimmO., PohlackS., CacciagliaR., WinkelmannT., PlichtaM.M., DemirakcaT., and FlorH. (2015). Amygdalar and hippocampal volume: a comparison between manual segmentation, Freesurfer and VBM. J. Neurosci. Methods, 253, 254–261.
18.
LydenH., GimbelS.I., Del PieroL., TsaiA.B., SachsM.E., KaplanJ.T., MargolinG., and SaxbeD. (2016). Associations between family adversity and brain volume in adolescence: Manual vs. Automated brain segmentation yields different results. Front. Neurosci. 10, 398.
BrewerJ.B., MagdaS., AirriessC., and SmithM.E. (2009). Fully-automated quantification of regional brain volumes for improved detection of focal atrophy in Alzheimer disease. AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol. 30, 578–580.
21.
BiglerE.D., AbildskovT.J., WildeE.A., McCauleyS.R., LiX., MerkleyT.L., FearingM.A., NewsomeM.R., ScheibelR.S., HunterJ.V., ChuZ., and LevinH.S. (2010). Diffuse damage in pediatric traumatic brain injury: a comparison of automated versus operator-controlled quantification methods. Neuroimage, 50, 1017–1026.
22.
BiglerE.D. (2015). Structural image analysis of the brain in neuropsychology using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) techniques. Neuropsychol. Rev. 25, 224–249.
23.
McCarthyC.S., RamprashadA., ThompsonC., BottiJ.A., ComanI.L., and KatesW.R. (2015). A comparison of FreeSurfer-generated data with and without manual intervention. Front. Neurosci. 9, 379.
24.
SpitzG., BiglerE.D., AbildskovT., MallerJ.J., O'SullivanR., and PonsfordJ.L. (2013). Regional cortical volume and cognitive functioning following traumatic brain injury. Brain Cogn. 83, 34–44.
25.
AzabM., CaroneM., YingS.H., and YousemD.M. (2015). Mesial temporal sclerosis: accuracy of NeuroQuant versus neuroradiologist. AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol. 36, 1400–1406.
26.
CaligiuriM.E., PerrottaP., AugimeriA., RoccaF., QuattroneA., and CherubiniA. (2015). Automatic detection of white matter hyperintensities in healthy aging and pathology using magnetic resonance imaging: a review. Neuroinformatics, 13, 261–276.
27.
Valdes HernandezM.D., ChappellF.M., Munoz ManiegaS., DickieD.A., RoyleN.A., MorrisZ., AnblaganD., SakkaE., ArmitageP.A., BastinM.E., DearyI.J., and WardlawJ.M. (2017). Metric to quantify white matter damage on brain magnetic resonance images. Neuroradiology, 59, 951–962.
28.
KinnunenK.M., GreenwoodR., PowellJ.H., LeechR., HawkinsP.C., BonnelleV., PatelM.C., CounsellS.J., and SharpD.J. (2011). White matter damage and cognitive impairment after traumatic brain injury. Brain, 134, 449–463.
29.
SchoemakerD., BussC., HeadK., SandmanC.A., DavisE.P., ChakravartyM.M., GauthierS., and PruessnerJ.C. (2016). Hippocampus and amygdala volumes from magnetic resonance images in children: assessing accuracy of FreeSurfer and FSL against manual segmentation. NeuroImage, 129, 1–14.
30.
WengerE., MartenssonJ., NoackH., BodammerN.C., KuhnS., SchaeferS., HeinzeH.J., DuzelE., BackmanL., LindenbergerU., and LovdenM. (2014). Comparing manual and automatic segmentation of hippocampal volumes: reliability and validity issues in younger and older brains. Hum. Brain Mapp. 35, 4236–4248.
31.
OchsA.L., RossD.E., ZannoniM.D., AbildskovT.J., BiglerE.D., and Alzheimer's Disease NeuroimagingInitiative. (2015). Comparison of automated brain volume measures obtained with NeuroQuant and FreeSurfer. J. Neuroimaging, 25, 721–727.
32.
ReidM.W., HannemannN.P., YorkG.E., RitterJ.L., KiniJ.A., LewisJ.D., ShermanP.M., VelezC.S., DrennonA.M., BolzeniusJ.D., and TateD.F. (2017). Comparing two processing pipelines to measure subcortical and cortical volumes in patients with and without mild traumatic brain injury. J. Neuroimaging, 27, 365–371.
33.
AlbrightJ., LeydenK., and AirriessC. (eds). (2016). The importance of quantitative volumetric analysis for brain MRI: 10 years of clinical practice. CorTechs Labs: San, Diego, CA,
34.
LuoW., LeydenK., UlugA.M., AlbrightJ., MagdaS., HaxtonR., and AirriessC. (eds). (2017). Lesionquant performance evaluation: accuracy and reproducibility. CorTechs Labs: San Diego, CA, pps. 1–7.
35.
LuoW., LeydenK., UlugA., MagdaS., AlbrightJ., HaxtonR., and AirriessC. (2017). Performance evaluation for automated lesion segmentation tool: Lesionquant. Neurology, 88, P4.355.
36.
GormanS., BarnesM.A., SwankP.R., PrasadM., CoxC.S.Jr., and Ewing-CobbsL. (2016). Does processing speed mediate the effect of pediatric traumatic brain injury on working memory?. Neuropsychology, 30, 263–273.
37.
BiglerE.D., AbildskovT.J., PetrieJ., FarrerT.J., DennisM., SimicN., TaylorH.G., RubinK.H., VannattaK., GerhardtC.A., StancinT., and Owen YeatesK. (2013). Heterogeneity of brain lesions in pediatric traumatic brain injury. Neuropsychology, 27, 438–451.
38.
AndersonV., GodfreyC., RosenfeldJ.V., and CatroppaC. (2012). 10 years outcome from childhood traumatic brain injury. Int. J. Dev. Neurosci. 30, 217–224.
39.
KourtidouP., McCauleyS.R., BiglerE.D., TraipeE., WuT.C., ChuZ.D., HunterJ.V., LiX., LevinH.S., and WildeE.A. (2013). Centrum semiovale and corpus callosum integrity in relation to information processing speed in patients with severe traumatic brain injury. J. Head Trauma Rehabil. 28, 433–441.
40.
WozniakJ.R., KrachL., WardE., MuellerB.A., MuetzelR., SchnoebelenS., KiraguA., and LimK.O. (2007). Neurocognitive and neuroimaging correlates of pediatric traumatic brain injury: a diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) study. Arch. Clin. Neuropsychol. 22, 555–568.
41.
KochunovP., CoyleT., LancasterJ., RobinD.A., HardiesJ., KochunovV., BartzokisG., StanleyJ., RoyallD., SchlosserA.E., NullM., and FoxP.T. (2010). Processing speed is correlated with cerebral health markers in the frontal lobes as quantified by neuroimaging. Neuroimage, 49, 1190–1199.
42.
GencS., AndersonV., RyanN.P., MalpasC.B., CatroppaC., BeauchampM.H., and SilkT.J. (2017). Recovery of white matter following pediatric traumatic brain injury depends on injury severity. J. Neurotrauma, 34, 798–806.
43.
PrigatanoG.P., GrayJ.A., and GaleS.D. (2008). Individual case analysis of processing speed difficulties in children with and without traumatic brain injury. Clin. Neuropsychol. 22, 603–619.
44.
FelminghamK.L., BaguleyI.J., and GreenA.M. (2004). Effects of diffuse axonal injury on speed of information processing following severe traumatic brain injury. Neuropsychology, 18, 564–571.
45.
DennisM., SimicN., Gerry TaylorH., BiglerE.D., RubinK., VannattaK., GerhardtC.A., StancinT., RoncadinC., and YeatesK.O. (2012). Theory of mind in children with traumatic brain injury. J. Int. Neuropsychol. Soc. 18, 908–916.
46.
YeatesK.O., GerhardtC.A., BiglerE.D., AbildskovT., DennisM., RubinK.H., StancinT., TaylorH.G., and VannattaK. (2013). Peer relationships of children with traumatic brain injury. J. Int. Neuropsychol. Soc. 19, 518–527.
47.
BiglerE.D., YeatesK.O., DennisM., GerhardtC.A., RubinK.H., StancinT., Gerry TaylorH., and VannattaK. (2013). Neuroimaging and social behavior in children after traumatic brain injury: Findings from the Social Outcomes of Brain Injury in Kids (SOBIK) study. NeuroRehabilitation, 32, 707–720.
48.
ShultzE.L., HoskinsonK.R., KeimM.C., DennisM., TaylorH.G., BiglerE.D., RubinK.H., VannattaK., GerhardtC.A., StancinT., and YeatesK.O. (2016). Adaptive functioning following pediatric traumatic brain injury: relationship to executive function and processing speed. Neuropsychology, 30, 830–840.
49.
BiglerE.D., ZielinskiB.A., Goodrich-HunsakerN., BlackG.M., HuffB.S., ChristiansenZ., WoodD.M., AbildskovT.J., DennisM., TaylorH.G., RubinK., VannattaK., GerhardtC.A., StancinT., and YeatesK.O. (2016). The relation of focal lesions to cortical thickness in pediatric traumatic brain injury. J. Child Neurol. 31, 1302–1311.
50.
LevinH.S. and Diaz-ArrastiaR.R. (2015). Diagnosis, prognosis, and clinical management of mild traumatic brain injury. Neurology, 14, 506–517.
51.
WechslerD. (2003). WISC-IV Administration Manual. The Psychological Corporation: San Antonio,TX.
52.
EritaiaJ., WoodS.J., StuartG.W., BridleN., DudgeonP., MaruffP., VelakoulisD., and PantelisC. (2000). An optimized method for estimating intracranial volume from magnetic resonance images. Magn. Reson. Med. 44, 973–977.
53.
CapizzanoA.A. , AciónL., BekinschteinT., FurmanM., GomilaH., MartínezA., MizrahiR., and StarksteinSE. (2004). White matter hyperintensities are significantly associated with cortical atrophy in Alzheimer's disease. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry, 75, 822–827.
54.
VannorsdallT.D., WaldsteinS.R., KrautM., PearlsonG.D., and SchretlenD.J. (2009). White matter abnormalities and cognition in a community sample. Arch. Clin. Neuropsychol. 24, 209–217.
55.
SchmidtP., GaserC., ArsicM., BuckD., ForschlerA., BertheleA., HoshiM., IlgR., SchmidV.J., ZimmerC., HemmerB., and MuhlauM. (2012). An automated tool for detection of FLAIR-hyperintense white-matter lesions in Multiple Sclerosis. Neuroimage, 59, 3774–3783.
56.
AlamG.C. and Sahu, W.C. (2010 ). Magnetic resonance imaging in evaluation of periventricular leukomalacia. Med. J. Armed Forces India 66, 374–380.
57.
LisantiC., CarlinC., BanksK.P., and WangD. (2007). Normal MRI appearance and motion-related phenomena of CSF. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 188, 716–725.
58.
ZimmermanR.D., FlemingC.A., LeeB.C., Saint-LouisL.A., and DeckM.D. (1986). Periventricular hyperintensity as seen by magnetic resonance: prevalence and signficiance. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 146, 443–450.
59.
KooT.K. and LiM.Y. (2016). A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J. Chiropr. Med. 15, 155–163.
60.
RankinG. and StokesM. (1998). Reliability of assessment tools in rehabilitation: an illustration of appropriate statistical analyses. Clin. Rehabil. 12, 187–199.
61.
CicchettiD.V. and SparrowS.A. (1981). Developing criteria for establishing interrater reliability of specific items: applications to assessment of adaptive behavior. Am. J. Ment. Defic. 86, 127–137.
62.
ShroutP.E. and FleissJ.L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol. Bull. 86, 420–428.
63.
BlandJ.M. and AltmanD.G. (1986). Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet, 1, 307–310.
64.
BenjaminiY. and HochbergY. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J. Royal Stat. Soc. 57, 289–300.
65.
StuckeyS.L., GohT.D., HeffernanT., and RowanD. (2007). Hyperintensity in the subarachnoid space on flair mri. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 189, 913–921.
66.
WangY., CatindigJ.A., HilalS., SoonH.W., TingE., WongT.Y., VenketasubramanianN., ChenC., and QiuA. (2012). Multi-stage segmentation of white matter hyperintensity, cortical and lacunar infarcts. Neuroimage, 60, 2379–2388.
67.
HarrisonS. (2017). New version of NeuroQuant now available- introducing user customizable reports and settings tailored to your clinical needs. (eds). CorTechs Labs,Inc.
GouwA.A., van der FlierW.M., van StraatenE.C., PantoniL., Bastos-LeiteA.J., InzitariD., ErkinjunttiT., WahlundL.O., RybergC., SchmidtR., FazekasF., ScheltensP., and BarkhofF. (2008). Reliability and sensitivity of visual scales versus volumetry for evaluating white matter hyperintensity progression. Cerebrovasc. Dis. 25, 247–253.
70.
van den HeuvelD.M., ten DamV.H., de CraenA.J., Admiraal-BehloulF., OlofsenH., BollenE.L., JollesJ., MurrayH.M., BlauwG.J., WestendorpR.G., and van BuchemM.A. (2006). Increase in periventricular white matter hyperintensities parallels decline in mental processing speed in a non-demented elderly population. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry, 77, 149–153.
71.
KapellerP., BarberR., VermeulenR.J., AdèrH., ScheltensP., FreidlW., AlmkvistO., MorettiM., del SerT., VaghfeldtP., EnzingerC., BarkhofF., InzitariD., ErkinjuntiT., SchmidtR., and FazekasF. (2003). Visual rating of age-related white watter changes on magnetic resonance imaging: scale comparison, interrater agreement, and correlations with quantitative measurements. Stroke, 34, 441–445.
72.
NeemaM., GussZ.D., StankiewiczJ.M., AroraA., HealyB.C., and BakshiR. (2009). Normal findings on brain fluid-attenuated inversion recovery MR images at 3T. AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol. 30, 911–916.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
