Image Registration Accuracy of a 3-Dimensional Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Prostate Biopsy System
Image Registration Accuracy of a 3-Dimensional Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Prostate Biopsy System
复制标题
DOI：
10.7863/jum.2009.28.11.1561
复制
发表时间：
2009-11-01
影响因子：
2.3
通讯作者：
Suri, Jasjit S.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Guo, Yujun;Werahera, Priya N.;Suri, Jasjit S.
Objective.对于后续前列腺活检程序，了解与当前经直肠超声（TRUS）扫描的解剖关系中的先前活检位置是有用的。本研究的目的是验证三维TRUS引导前列腺活检系统的性能，该系统可以准确地重新定位先前的活检部位。方法.为了将来自患者的一系列就诊的活检位置相关联，需要将从先前就诊获得的前列腺表面数据配准到后续就诊。两种插值方法，薄板样条（TIPS）和弹性翘曲（EW），进行了测试，用于登记的TRUS前列腺图像的后续扫描。我们使用定制的体模验证了我们的活检系统。微珠嵌入体模内，并位于每次TRUS扫描中。我们记录了压力施加到体模之前和之后微珠的位置，然后将其与计算机估计的位置进行比较以测量性能。结果在我们的实验中，在系统处理之前，平均目标配准误差（TRE）+/- SD为6.4 +/- 4.5 mm（范围，3-13 mm）。配准和TPS插值后，THE为5.0 +/- 1.03 mm（范围，2-8 mm）。配准和EW插值后，THE为2.7 +/- 0.99 mm（范围，1-4 mm）。在大多数情况下，弹性翘曲明显优于TIPS（P < .0011）。对于临床应用，EW可以在图形处理单元上实现，执行时间小于2.5秒。结论.对于TRUS前列腺图像的配准，弹性扭曲插值产生比TPS更准确的结果。实验结果表明，这种方法的临床应用潜力。
Objective. For a follow-up prostate biopsy procedure, it is useful to know the previous biopsy locations in anatomic relation to the current transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) scan. The goal of this study was to validate the performance of a 3-dimensional TRUS-guided prostate biopsy system that can accurately relocate previous biopsy sites. Methods. To correlate biopsy locations from a sequence of visits by a patient, the prostate surface data obtained from a previous visit needs to be registered to the followup visits. Two interpolation methods, thin-plate spline (TIPS) and elastic warping (EW), were tested for registration of the TRUS prostate image to follow-up scans. We validated our biopsy system using a custom-built phantom. Beads were embedded inside the phantom and were located in each TRUS scan. We recorded the locations of the beads before and after pressures were applied to the phantom and then compared them with computer-estimated positions to measure performance. Results. In our experiments, before system processing, the mean target registration error (TRE) +/- SD was 6.4 +/- 4.5 mm (range, 3-13 mm). After registration and TPS interpolation, the THE was 5.0 +/- 1.03 mm (range, 2-8 mm). After registration and EW interpolation, the THE was 2.7 +/- 0.99 mm (range, 1-4 mm). Elastic warping was significantly better than the TIPS in most cases (P < .0011). For clinical applications, EW can be implemented on a graphics processing unit with an execution time of less than 2.5 seconds. Conclusions. Elastic warping interpolation yields more accurate results than the TPS for registration of TRUS prostate images. Experimental results indicate potential for clinical application of this method.