Comparison and evaluation of retrospective intermodality brain image registration techniques
Comparison and evaluation of retrospective intermodality brain image registration techniques
复制标题
DOI：
10.1097/00004728-199707000-00007
复制
发表时间：
1997-07-01
影响因子：
1.3
通讯作者：
Woods, RP
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
West, J;Fitzpatrick, JM;Woods, RP
目的：本研究的主要目的是使用基于标记的前瞻性配准方法作为黄金标准，对一组回顾性图像配准技术进行盲法评估。为了确保盲性，所有回顾性注册均由在提交结果之前不了解黄金标准结果的参与者进行。该项目的第二个目标是通过比较校正图像（即应用了畸变校正的图像）与校正前相同图像的回顾性配准误差，来评估校正 MR 图像中几何畸变的重要性。方法：从范德比尔特大学医学中心接受神经外科手术的患者获得三种模式（CT、MR 和 PET）的图像体积。 安装了骨植入基准标记。这些卷已去除所有标记痕迹，并通过互联网提供给范德比尔特以外的项目合作者，然后项目合作者对这些卷进行回顾性注册，计算从 CT 到 MR 和/或从 PET 到 MR 的转换。这些调查人员通过互联网再次将他们的转变传达给范德比尔特大学，在那里评估每个注册的准确性。在此评估中，准确性是在多个感兴趣体积 (VOIs) 下测量的，即大脑中通常是神经学感兴趣区域的区域。在 MR 图像中定义 VOI，并确定其质心 c。然后，利用前瞻性配准获得CT或PET中对应的c'点。此时，将应用追溯注册，在 MR 中生成 c ''。收集目标配准误差 (TRE) 的统计数据，即原始点 c 与其对应点 c'' 之间的距离。结果：本文介绍了本研究中每种配准技术计算出的 TRE 的统计数据，并提供了每种技术的简要描述以及执行配准所需的准备和执行时间的估计。结论：我们的结果表明，回顾性技术有可能在大部分情况下产生令人满意的结果。 时间，但目视检查是必要的，以防止出现大的错误。
Purpose: The primary objective of this study is to perform a blinded evaluation of a group of retrospective image registration techniques using as a gold standard a prospective, marker-based registration method. To ensure blindedness, all retrospective registrations were performed by participants who had no knowledge of the gold standard results until after their results had been submitted. A secondary goal of the project is to evaluate the importance of correcting geometrical distortion in MR images by comparing the retrospective registration error in the rectified images, i.e., those that have had the distortion correction applied, with that of the same images before rectification.Method: Image volumes of three modalities (CT, MR, and PET) were obtained from patients undergoing neurosurgery at Vanderbilt University Medical Center on whom bone-implanted fiducial markers were mounted. These volumes had all traces of the markers removed and were provided via the Internet to project collaborators outside Vanderbilt, who then performed retrospective registrations on the volumes, calculating transformations from CT to MR and/or from PET to MR. These investigators communicated their transformations again via the Internet to Vanderbilt, where the accuracy bf each registration was evaluated. In this evaluation, the accuracy is measured at multiple volumes of interest (VOIs), i.e., areas in the brain that would commonly be areas of neurological interest. A VOI is defined in the MR image and its centroid c is determined. Then, the prospective registration is used to obtain the corresponding point c' in CT or PET. To this point, the retrospective registration is then applied, producing c '' in MR. Statistics are gathered on the target registration error (TRE), which is the distance between the original point c and its corresponding point c ''.Results: This article presents statistics on the TRE calculated for each registration technique in this study and provides a brief description of each technique and an estimate of both preparation and execution time needed to perform the registration.Conclusion: Our results indicate that retrospective techniques have the potential to produce satisfactory results much of the time, but that visual inspection is necessary to guard against large errors.