Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparing two approaches to rigid registration of three-dimensional ultrasound and magnetic resonance images for neurosurgery

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

We present a new technique for registering magnetic resonance (MR) and ultrasound images in the context of neurosurgery. It involves generating a pseudo-ultrasound (pseudo-US) from a segmented MR image and uses cross-correlation as the cost function to register the pseudo-US to the real ultrasound data. The algorithm’s performance is compared with that of a state-of-the-art technique that uses a median-filtered MR image to register to a Gaussian-blurred ultrasound using a normalized mutual information (NMI) objective function.

Methods

The two methods were tested on data from 15 patients with brain tumor, including low-and high-grade gliomas, in both first operations and reoperations. Two metrics were used to evaluate registration accuracy: (1) the mean distance between corresponding points, identified on both MR and ultrasound images by two experts, and (2) ratings based on visual comparison by one neurosurgeon.

Results

The mean residual distance of the pseudo-US technique, 2.97 mm, is significantly more accurate (p = .0011) than that of the NMI approach, 4.86 mm. The visual assessment shows that only 4 of the 15 cases had a satisfactory initial alignment based on homologous skin-point registration. There is a significant correlation between the quantitative distance measures and the qualitative ratings (rho = 0.785).

Conclusion

The results show that the pseudo-US rigid registration technique robustly improves the MRI–ultrasound alignment when compared with the initial alignment, even when applied to highly distorted brains and a large range of tumor sizes and appearances.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. van Velthoven V (2003) Intraoperative ultrasound imaging: comparison of pathomorphological findings in US versus CT, MRI and intraoperative findings. Acta Neurochir Suppl 85: 95–99

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Woydt M, Krone A, Becker G, Schmidt K, Roggendorf W, Roosen K (1996) Correlation of intra-operative ultrasound with histopathologic findings after tumour resection in supratentorial gliomas. A method to improve gross total tumour resection. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 138(12): 1391–1398

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. LeRoux PD, Winter TC, Berger MS, Mack LA, Wang K, Elliott JP (1994) A comparison between preoperative magnetic resonance and intraoperative ultrasound tumor volumes and margins. J Clin Ultrasound 22(1): 29–36

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Erdogan N, Tucer B, Mavili E, Menku A, Kurtsoy A (2005) Ultrasound guidance in intracranial tumor resection: correlation with postoperative magnetic resonance findings. Acta Radiol 46(7): 743–749

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Tirakotai W, Miller D, Heinze S, Benes L, Bertalanffy H, Sure U (2006) A novel platform for image-guided ultrasound. Neurosurgery 58(4): 710–718 (discussion 710–718)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Unsgaard G, Selbekk T, Brostrup Muller T, Ommedal S, Torp SH, Myhr G, Bang J, Nagelhus Hernes TA (2005) Ability of navigated 3D ultrasound to delineate gliomas and metastases—comparison of image interpretations with histopathology. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 147(12): 1259–1269 (discussion 1269)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Unsgaard G, Ommedal S, Muller T, Gronningsaeter A, Nagelhus Hernes TA (2002) Neuronavigation by intraoperative three-dimensional ultrasound: initial experience during brain tumor resection. Neurosurgery 50(4): 804–812 (discussion 812)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Stummer W, Pichlmeier U, Meinel T, Wiestler OD, Zanella F, Reulen HJ (2006) Fluorescence-guided surgery with 5-aminolevulinic acid for resection of malignant glioma: a randomised controlled multicentre phase III trial. Lancet Oncol 7(5): 392–401. doi:S1470-2045(06)70665-9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Hatiboglu MA, Weinberg JS, Suki D, Rao G, Prabhu SS, Shah K, Jackson E, Sawaya R (2009) Impact of intraoperative high-field magnetic resonance imaging guidance on glioma surgery: a prospective volumetric analysis. Neurosurgery 64(6): 1073–1081

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Nimsky C, Fujita A, Ganslandt O, Von Keller B, Fahlbusch R (2004) Volumetric assessment of glioma removal by intraoperative high-field magnetic resonance imaging. Neurosurgery 55(2): 358–370 (discussion 370–371)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Gerganov VM, Samii A, Akbarian A, Stieglitz L, Samii M, Fahlbusch R (2009) Reliability of intraoperative high-resolution 2D ultrasound as an alternative to high-field strength MR imaging for tumor resection control: a prospective comparative study. J Neurosurg 111(3): 512–519

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Unsgaard G, Gronningsaeter A, Ommedal S, Nagelhus Hernes TA (2002) Brain operations guided by real-time two-dimensional ultrasound: new possibilities as a result of improved image quality. Neurosurgery 51(2): 402–411 (discussion 411–412)

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Mercier L, Del Maestro RF, Petrecca K, Collins DL (2010) Experience using intraoperative 3D ultrasound in 14 brain tumors cases. In: Canadian Neuro-Oncology Meeting, Niagara-on-the-Lake, Canada

  14. Letteboer MM, Willems PW, Viergever MA, Niessen WJ (2005) Brain shift estimation in image-guided neurosurgery using 3-D ultrasound. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 52(2): 268–276

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lunn KE, Hartov A, Kennedy FE, Miga MI, Roberts DW, Platenik LA, Paulsen KD (2001) 3D ultrasound as sparse data for intraoperative brain deformation model. Proc SPIE 4325: 326–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Roberts DW, Miga MI, Kennedy FE, Hartov A, Paulsen KD (1999) Intraoperatively updated neuroimaging using brain modeling and sparse data. Neurosurgery 45: 1199–1207

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Mercier L, Lango T, Lindseth F, Collins DL (2005) A review of calibration techniques for freehand 3-D ultrasound systems. Ultrasound Med Biol 31(4): 449–471

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Bucholz RD, Yeh DD, Trobaugh JW, McDurmott LL (1997) The correction of stereotactic inaccuracy caused by brain shift using an intraoperative ultrasound device. CVRMed MRCAS’ 97: 459–466

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Comeau RM, Sadikot AF, Fenster A, Peters TM (2000) Intraoperative ultrasound for guidance and tissue shift correction in image-guided neurosurgery. Med Phys 27(4): 787–800

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Arbel T, Morandi X, Comeau RM, Collins DL (2001) Automatic non-linear MRI-ultrasound registration for the correction of intra-operative brain deformations. In: MICCAI 2001, Utrecht, The Netherlands. Springer, LNCS, pp 913–922

  21. Arbel T, Morandi X, Comeau RM, Collins DL (2004) Automatic non-linear MRI-ultrasound registration for the correction of intra-operative brain deformations. Comput Aided Surg 9(4): 123–136

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Penney GP, Blackall JM, Hamady MS, Sabharwal T, Adam A, Hawkes DJ (2004) Registration of freehand 3D ultrasound and magnetic resonance liver images. Med Image Anal 8(1): 81–91

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Wein W, Brunke S, Khamene A, Callstrom MR, Navab N (2008) Automatic CT-ultrasound registration for diagnostic imaging and image-guided intervention. Med Image Anal 12(5): 577–585

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Wein W, Roper B, Navab N (2005) Automatic registration and fusion of ultrasound with CT for radiotherapy. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv 8(Pt 2): 303–311

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Wein W, Khamene A, Clevert DA, Kutter O, Navab N (2007) Simulation and fully automatic multimodal registration of medical ultrasound. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv 10(Pt 1): 136–143

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. King AP, Ma YL, Yao C, Jansen C, Razavi R, Rhode KS, Penney GP (2009) Image-to-physical registration for image-guided interventions using 3-D ultrasound and an ultrasound imaging model. Inf Process Med Imaging 21: 188–201

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. El Ganaoui O, Morandi X, Duchesne S, Jannin P (2008) Preoperative brain shift: study of three surgical cases. Proc SPIE 6918

  28. Coupe P, Hellier P, Morandi X, Barillot C (2007) A probabilistic objective function for 3d rigid registration of intraoperative Us and preoperative MR brain images. In: Paper presented at the ISBI

  29. Reinertsen I, Lindseth F, Unsgaard G, Collins DL (2007) Clinical validation of vessel-based registration for correction of brain-shift. Med Image Anal 11(6): 673–684

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Roche A, Pennec X, Malandain G, Ayache N (2001) Rigid registration of 3-D ultrasound with MR images: a new approach combining intensity and gradient information. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 20(10): 1038–1049

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Ji S, Wu Z, Hartov A, Roberts DW, Paulsen KD (2008) Mutual-information-based image to patient re-registration using intraoperative ultrasound in image-guided neurosurgery. Med Phys 35(10): 4612–4624

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Wu Z, Hartov A, Paulsen K, Roberts DW (2004) Multimodal image re-registration via mutual information to account for initial tissue motion during image-guided neurosurgery. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 3: 1675–1678

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Mercier L, Fonov V, Del Maestro RF, Petrecca K, Østergaard LRC (2010) D.L. Rigid registration of 3D ultrasound and MRI: comparing two approaches on nine tumor cas. In: CIM symposium on brain, body and machine, Montreal, Canada, Nov 2010. Springer

  34. Gobbi DG, Comeau RM, Peters TM (1999) Ultrasound probe tracking for real-time ultrasound/MRI overlay and visualization of brain shift. In: MICCAI 1999, Cambridge, UK. Springer, Lecture notes in computer science, pp 920–927

  35. Solberg OV, Lindseth F, Torp H, Blake RE, Hernes TA (2007) Freehand 3d ultrasound reconstruction algorithms—a review. Ultrasound Med Biol

  36. Neelin P (1998) The MINC file format:from bytes to brains. NeuroImage 7(4): 786

    Google Scholar 

  37. Coupe P, Yger P, Prima S, Hellier P, Kervrann C, Barillot C (2008) An optimized blockwise nonlocal means denoising filter for 3-D magnetic resonance images. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 27(4): 425–441

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. MacDonald D, Kabani N, Avis D, Evans AC (2000) Automated 3-D extraction of inner and outer surfaces of cerebral cortex from MRI. Neuroimage 12(3): 340–356

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Zijdenbos AP, Dawant BM, Margolin RA, Palmer AC (1994) Morphometric analysis of white matter lesions in MR images: method and validation. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 13(4): 716–724

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Janke AL, Evans AC (2006) Collins DL MNI and Talairach space: Everything you wanted to know but were afraid to ask. In: HMB, Florence, Italy

  41. Collins D, Zijdenbos A, Baaré W, Evans A (1999) ANIMAL+INSECT: improved cortical structure segmentation. In: Kuba A, Šáamal M, Todd-Pokropek A (eds) information processing in medical imaging, vol 1613. Lecture notes in computer science. Springer Berlin, pp 210–223. doi:10.1007/3-540-48714-x_16

  42. Shekhar R, Zagrodsky V (2002) Mutual information-based rigid and nonrigid registration of ultrasound volumes. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 21(1): 9–22

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Otsu N (1979) A threshold selection method from gray-level histograms. IEEE Trans Sys Man Cyber 9: 62–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Jannin P, Fitzpatrick JM, Hawkes DJ, Pennec X, Shahidi R, Vannier MW (2002) Validation of medical image processing in image-guided therapy. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 21(12): 1445–1449. doi:10.1109/TMI.2002.806568

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Reinertsen I, Descoteaux M, Siddiqi K, Collins DL (2007) Validation of vessel-based registration for correction of brain shift. Med Image Anal 11(4): 374–388

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Lindseth F, Ommedal S, Bang J, Unsgaard G, Nagelhus Hernes TA (2001) Image fusion of ultrasound and MRI as an aid for assessing anatomical shifts and improving overview and interpretation in ultrasound guided neurosurgery. In: CARS 2001, pp 247–252

  47. Hartov A, Roberts DW, Paulsen KD (2008) A comparative analysis of coregistered ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in neurosurgery. Neurosurgery 62(3 Suppl 1): 91–99

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. McConnell Brain Imaging Centre, Montreal Neurological Institute, McGill University, Room WB-320, 3801 University Street, Montreal, QC, H3A 2B4, Canada

    Laurence Mercier, Vladimir Fonov & Claire Haegelen

  2. INSERM, U746, Faculty of Medicine, University of Rennes I, Rennes, France

    Claire Haegelen

  3. INRIA, VisAGeSUnit/Project, University of Rennes I, Rennes, France

    Claire Haegelen

  4. CNRS, UMR 6074, IRISA, University of Rennes I, Rennes, France

    Claire Haegelen

  5. Brain Tumour Research Centre, McGill University, Montreal, Canada

    Rolando F. Del Maestro & Kevin Petrecca

  6. McConnell Brain Imaging Center, Montreal Neurological Institute, McGill University, Room WB-314, 3801 University Street, Montreal, QC, H3A 2B4, Canada

    D. Louis Collins

Authors
  1. Laurence Mercier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vladimir Fonov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Claire Haegelen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rolando F. Del Maestro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kevin Petrecca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. D. Louis Collins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Laurence Mercier.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mercier, L., Fonov, V., Haegelen, C. et al. Comparing two approaches to rigid registration of three-dimensional ultrasound and magnetic resonance images for neurosurgery. Int J CARS 7, 125–136 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-011-0620-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-011-0620-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation