Back

Automated Brain and CSF Volume Assessment in Infant Hydrocephalus Using Deep Learning

Yu, M.; Yoshikawa, M. H.; Luviano, A. S.; Schiff, S. J.; Monga, V.; Warf, B. C.; Grant, P. E.; Sutin, J.; Lin, P.-Y.

2026-05-08 radiology and imaging
10.64898/2026.05.07.26352592 medRxiv
Show abstract

Accurate brain and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) volume assessment is essential for pediatric hydrocephalus management. Current clinical practice relies on linear measurements that fail to capture complex three-dimensional ventricular morphology, while quantitative volumetric assessment remains limited by laborious processing and lack of clinically optimized automated tools. This study developed a rapid, automated AI-based intracranial segmentation model suitable for clinical workflows. We retrospectively analyzed 167 T2-weighted MRI scans from infants with hydrocephalus, randomly split into training (60%), validation (20%), and hold-out test (20%) sets. All scans were manually segmented into CSF, brain parenchyma, and background. Our model integrates DenseNet and U-Net architectures with feature smoothness regularization to enhance generalizability. Performance was evaluated using Dice scores and absolute relative volume error (ARVE) compared with state-of-the-art methods. The AI model achieved Dice scores of 95.7% for CSF and 96.4% for brain parenchyma on the hold-out test set, significantly outperforming FSL FAST (85.0% and 77.9%) and contemporary deep learning approaches (90.4% and 89.7%). Processing time was 0.8 seconds per scan using GPU acceleration. The model demonstrated consistent performance across different hydrocephalus etiologies and effectively handled challenging scenarios including noise, artifacts, and variable resolution. This study successfully developed a robust MRI segmentation model demonstrating superior accuracy and efficiency compared to existing methods. By incorporating domain-specific enhancements, the model enables rapid, clinically viable brain and CSF volume estimation for pediatric hydrocephalus care.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
NeuroImage
813 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
22.2%
2
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 7%
9.9%
3
Human Brain Mapping
295 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
8.3%
4
Imaging Neuroscience
242 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
8.3%
5
European Radiology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.8%
50% of probability mass above
6
NeuroImage: Clinical
132 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
4.8%
7
IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
8
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
21 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.7%
9
Medical Physics
14 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.0%
10
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 48%
2.0%
11
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 48%
2.0%
12
Computers in Biology and Medicine
120 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
13
Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
14 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
14
Neuroinformatics
40 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.3%
15
Frontiers in Neuroscience
223 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.3%
16
Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
72 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.3%
17
Neuro-Oncology Advances
24 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
18
Diagnostics
48 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
19
Scientific Data
174 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
20
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 54%
0.9%
21
eBioMedicine
130 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
22
IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering
38 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.7%
23
Science Translational Medicine
111 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.7%
24
IEEE Access
31 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
25
Communications Medicine
85 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
26
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
53 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
27
Journal of Medical Imaging
11 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
28
Medical Image Analysis
33 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
29
Nature Machine Intelligence
61 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.6%