Dear FreeSurfer Developers, I seek clarification regarding a discrepancy in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) volume measurements obtained using different FreeSurfer tools.
In my analysis, I measured CSF volume using both recon-all-clinical.sh and SAMSEG for the same subject. However, the results were significantly different: recon-all-clinical: 236,073.36 mm³ (~236 mL) SAMSEG: 471,854.76 mm³ (~472 mL) Additionally, I conducted SAMSEG on 10 neurologically healthy subjects, and in all cases, the CSF volume was at least twice the normal average CSF volume (~150 mL) reported in the literature. I would appreciate any insights into the following questions: Why is there such a large discrepancy between the two methods? Which method provides a more reliable estimate of total CSF volume? Why are the estimated CSF volumes significantly higher than the known physiological average? Thank you for your time and assistance! Best regards, Nima
_______________________________________________ Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mail contains patient information, please contact the Mass General Brigham Compliance HelpLine at https://www.massgeneralbrigham.org/complianceline <https://www.massgeneralbrigham.org/complianceline> . Please note that this e-mail is not secure (encrypted). If you do not wish to continue communication over unencrypted e-mail, please notify the sender of this message immediately. Continuing to send or respond to e-mail after receiving this message means you understand and accept this risk and wish to continue to communicate over unencrypted e-mail.
