Table 5.
Results of tractography assessment, grouped by assessment method used for the validation of the anatomical fidelity. (a) simple direct visual assessment (success/failure); (b) Direct visual assessment score; (c) Percentage of crossing fibers reconstructed; (d) Surgical evaluation, i.e. di the tract follow the anatomy visualized during surgery; (e) Other assessment methods.
| (a) Direct visual assessment Article |
Results | Patient population |
|---|---|---|
| Jin (2019) | DTI OC 0/5 (0%), OT 5/5 (100%) GQI OC 5/5 (100%), OT 5/5 (100%) |
|
| Kammen (2016) | 215/215 (Human connectome project) | |
| Kamali (2014) | 5/5. The intraorbital segment of the optic nerve was not reconstructed | |
| Maleki (2012) | 9/9 | |
| Hofer (2010) | 3 segments (lateral/nasal ON, OT): 5/6; 2 segments: 1/6 | |
| Staempfli (2007) | 10/10 | |
| Manners (2022) | 6/8 Pts; 12/13 HC | LHON |
| Takemura (2019) | 7/7 Pts; 20/20 HC | LHON |
| Lecler (2018) | Agreement with anatomy, no chiasm visible | Congenital achiasma |
| Davies-Thompson (2013) | 9/9 HC; agreement with anatomy and no chiasm visible in the patient | |
| Miler (2019) | 6/6 Pts; 6/6 HC | Unilateral advanced stage glaucoma |
| Allen (2018) | 15/15 Pts; 13/13 HC | Amblyopia |
| Altıntaş (2017) | 15/15 Pts; 10/10 HC | Amblyopia |
| Liang (2021) | 65/65 Pts; 33/33 HC | Hypophyseal macroadenoma |
| Ho (2019) | ON L: 26/29; ON R: 27/29; OT L: 28/29; OT R: 28/29 | OPG |
| Jacquesson (2019) | 5/5 | Skull base tumours |
| Wu (2019) | 20/20 Pts; 25/25 HC | Orbital space occupying lesions |
| Ma (2017) | 5/5 | Meningioma |
| Zolal (2017) | 1/2 | Meningioma |
| Yoshino (2016) | 3/3 Pts; 288/288 HC | Hypophyseal adenoma |
| Haijabadi (2016) | preoperative: 3/25 | Suprasellar tumours |
| intraoperative: 5/25 | ||
| 1 week post-op: 9/25 | ||
| 3 week post-op: 15/25 | ||
| 3 months post-op 18/25 | ||
| Ge (2015) | ON 10/11 with 2/11 interrupted; OT 7/11 | OPG |
| Hajiabadi (2015) | Preoperative tractography ON 1/2 (50%); OC 0/2 (0%); OT 1/2 (50%) | Hypophyseal macroadenoma with ophthalmological comorbidities |
| Intraoperative tractography ON 1/2 (50%); OC 1/2 (50%); OT 2/2 (100%) | ||
| Postoperative tractography ON 2/2 (100%); OC 2/2 (50%); OT 2/2 (100%) | ||
| De Blank (2013) | 45.5/50 Pts (91/100 eyes) | OPG NF1 type |
| Lober (2012) | R normal 5/10, fewer fibres than normal 5/10, L normal 5/10, fewer fibres than normal 4/10, no fibres 1/10 | OPG |
| Zhang (2012) | 36/36 Pts; 30/30 HC. Compression and shift due to tumour clearly visible | Orbital tumours, occipital lobe tumours |
| Hodaie (2010) | 4/4 | CNS tumours |
| Salmela (2009) | HC: ON 10/10, OC 10/10, OT 10/10; Pts: ON 2/2, OC 1/2, OT 0,5/2 | Paediatric suprasellar tumours |
| Tao (2009) | ON 27/45; OC and OT 45/45. 7/30 patients clearly presented a visible change of course due to compression by the tumour | Orbital tumours |
| Orbital chronic inflammation | ||
| Techavipoo (2009) | 16/16 Pts; 7/7 HC | Multiple sclerosis |
| Lacerda (2021) | 4/4 Pts, 20/20 HC | Epilepsy |
| Yang (2011) | Full reconstruction 1/6; partial reconstruction 3/6; no reconstruction 2/6 | Traumatic optic neuropathy |
| (b) Direct visual assessment (rating score) Article |
Results | Population | Harmonised results |
|---|---|---|---|
| He (2021) | SD-Stream. DVA score 3.26 (scale 4–1) | HC | 24.7 |
| iFOD1. DVA score 2.93 | 35.7 | ||
| UKF-1T. DVA score 2.32 | 56.0 | ||
| UKF-2T. DVA score 1.47 | 84.3 | ||
| Akazawa (2010) | b = 700: DVA score 0.72 (Scale 0–3) | HC | 24.0 |
| b = 1400: DVA score 1.01 | 33.7 | ||
| b = 2100: DVA score 0.78 | 26.0 | ||
| b = 2800: DVA score 1.01 | 33.7 | ||
| Hofer (2010) | Nasal optic nerve: 2/6 XX; 3/6 X, 1/6 0 | HC | 58.3 |
| Lateral optic nerve: 5/6 XX; 1/6 X; 0/6 0 | 91.7 | ||
| Optic tract: 6/6 XX; 0/6 X; 0/6 0 | 100 | ||
| Lin (2018) | Optic nerve: 4.00 (score 0–5) | Sellar region tumors | 80.0 |
| Optic chiasm: 4.12 | 82.0 |
| (c) Percentage of crossing fibers reconstructed Article |
Processing variant | Population | Results | Population | Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| He (2021) | Sd-Stream | HC | 30.6 | ||
| iFOD1 | 45.3 | ||||
| UKF-1T | 28.1 | ||||
| UKF-2T | 77.6 | ||||
| Manners (2022) | – | HC | 49.1 | LHON | 52.3 |
| Ather (2019) | – | HC | 29.4 | albinism | 42.2 |
| J Puzniak (2019) | DT unfiltered | HC | 5.8 | albinism | 40.5 |
| DT LiFE | 11.0 | 37.0 | |||
| DT COMMIT-SB | 20.3 | 42.0 | |||
| DT COMMIT-SZB | 22.5 | 46.3 | |||
| DT SIFT2 | 8.9 | 40.2 | |||
| CSD unfiltered | 19.2 | 41.1 | |||
| CSD LiFE | 35.9 | 42.3 | |||
| CSD COMMIT-SB | 28.6 | 41.3 | |||
| CSD COMMIT-SZB | 30.6 | 44.8 | |||
| CSD SIFT2 | 8.9 | 39.1 |
| (d) Surgical evaluation Article |
Results | Population | Harmonised results |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chakravarthi (2021) | Agreement. 24/24 | skull base meningiomas | 100 |
| Jacquesson (2019) | Agreement: 5/5 | skull base tumors | 100 |
| Ma (2017) | Agreement: 5/5 | meningioma | 100 |
| Zolal (2017) | Agreement 1/2 | meningioma | 50 |
| Ge (2015) | Agreement: 8/8 | OPG | 100 |
| (e) Other evaluation methods Article |
Processing variant | Population | Measure | Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| He (2021) | SD-Stream | HC | NOS | 0.398 |
| iFOD1 | NOS | 0.605 | ||
| UKF-1T | NOS | 0.508 | ||
| UKF-2T | NOS | 0.719 | ||
| Manners (2022) | HC | Dice | 0.658 | |
| LHON | Dice | 0.817 | ||
| Puzniak (2021) | For all participants high number of fascicles (10000 or higher) with non null LiFE score | Achiasma, albinism, chiasmatic hypoplasia | RMSE | < 2 mm |
| Zolal (2017) | Deterministic | HC | Dice | 0.44 |
| Probabilistic | Dice | 0.55 | ||
| Deterministic | FPR | 0.22 | ||
| Probabilistic | FPR | 0.04 |
Legend. For studies that employed direct visual assessment (DVA) of the reconstructions, the number of subjects in which they were considered adequate was reported. When a score-based visual assessment method was implemented this was reported as developed by the authors. In order to facilitate comparing the results, a harmonised result was computed for the latter method converting the score on a scale from 0 to 100 where the latter value represents a perfect reconstruction. For studies that used a surgical evaluation method, the number of subjects in whom reconstructions were judged adequate was reported. As harmonised result, the percentage of subjects in whom reconstructions were judged adequate was chosen. For the studies that computed the percentage of crossing fibers in the chiasm as a quantitative computative method, it was decided to report this data directly. The value should be compared with what was reported from histological studies (56%) (Chacko, 1948, Kupfer et al., 1967). For studies that used other quantitative computative methods, their result was reported directly. For studies performed on both patients and healthy controls, it was decided, because of the lack of comparability, to report the two results separately.
Abbreviations: Pts - patients; HC - healthy controls; ON - optic nerve; OC - optic chiasm; OT - optic tract; GCA - giant cell arteritis, OPG – optic pathway glioma; NF1 – neurofibromatosis 1; CNS – central nervous system; LHON – Leber’s hereditary optic neuropathy; NOS - normalized overlap score; FPR – false positive rate; RMSE – Root mean square error; UKF - unscented Kalman filter; DT - diffusion tensor; CSD – constrained spherical deconvolution; LiFE – linear fascicle evaluation; COMMIT - convex optimization modeling for microstructure informed tractography; SIFT - spherical-deconvolution informed filtering of tractograms; DVA – direct visual assessment; GQI – generalized q-sampling imaging.