Advertisement

Abdominal Radiology

, Volume 42, Issue 6, pp 1799–1808 | Cite as

A prospective comparison between auto-registration and manual registration of real-time ultrasound with MR images for percutaneous ablation or biopsy of hepatic lesions

  • Dong Ik Cha
  • Min Woo LeeEmail author
  • Kyoung Doo Song
  • Young-Taek Oh
  • Ja-Yeon Jeong
  • Jung-Woo Chang
  • Jiwon Ryu
  • Kyong Joon Lee
  • Jaeil Kim
  • Won-Chul Bang
  • Dong Kuk Shin
  • Sung Jin Choi
  • Dalkwon Koh
  • Bong Koo Seo
  • Kyunga Kim
Article

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the accuracy and required time for image fusion of real-time ultrasound (US) with pre-procedural magnetic resonance (MR) images between positioning auto-registration and manual registration for percutaneous radiofrequency ablation or biopsy of hepatic lesions.

Methods

This prospective study was approved by the institutional review board, and all patients gave written informed consent. Twenty-two patients (male/female, n = 18/n = 4; age, 61.0 ± 7.7 years) who were referred for planning US to assess the feasibility of radiofrequency ablation (n = 21) or biopsy (n = 1) for focal hepatic lesions were included. One experienced radiologist performed the two types of image fusion methods in each patient. The performance of auto-registration and manual registration was evaluated. The accuracy of the two methods, based on measuring registration error, and the time required for image fusion for both methods were recorded using in-house software and respectively compared using the Wilcoxon signed rank test.

Results

Image fusion was successful in all patients. The registration error was not significantly different between the two methods (auto-registration: median, 3.75 mm; range, 1.0–15.8 mm vs. manual registration: median, 2.95 mm; range, 1.2–12.5 mm, p = 0.242). The time required for image fusion was significantly shorter with auto-registration than with manual registration (median, 28.5 s; range, 18–47 s, vs. median, 36.5 s; range, 14–105 s, p = 0.026).

Conclusion

Positioning auto-registration showed promising results compared with manual registration, with similar accuracy and even shorter registration time.

Keywords

Fusion imaging Radiofrequency ablation Biopsy Liver Automatic registration 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Funding

This study was supported by Samsung Medison (Grant #PHO0132251).

Conflict of interest

Dong Kuk Shin, Sung Jin Choi, and Dalkwon Koh received support in the form of salaries from Samsung Medison. Min Woo Lee is a consultant for Samsung Medison. All other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Supplementary material

261_2017_1075_MOESM1_ESM.docx (14 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 15 kb)
261_2017_1075_MOESM2_ESM.wmv (17.8 mb)
Supplementary Movie Positioning auto-registration between real-time US and pre-acquired MR images in a patient with hepatocellular carcinoma (same patient as in Fig. 4) (WMV 18247 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Minami Y, Kudo M (2014) Ultrasound fusion imaging of hepatocellular carcinoma: a review of current evidence. Dig Dis 32:690–695CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lee MW, Rhim H, Cha DI, Kim YJ, Lim HK (2013) Planning US for percutaneous radiofrequency ablation of small hepatocellular carcinomas (1-3 cm): value of fusion imaging with conventional US and CT/MR images. J Vasc Interv Radiol 24:958–965. doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2013.04.007 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hirooka M, Iuchi H, Kumagi T, et al. (2006) Virtual sonographic radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma visualized on CT but not on conventional sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:S255–S260CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Minami Y, Chung H, Kudo M, et al. (2008) Radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma: value of virtual CT sonography with magnetic navigation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 190:W335–W341. doi: 10.2214/AJR.07.3092 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lee MW, Rhim H, Cha DI, et al. (2012) Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma: fusion imaging guidance for management of lesions with poor conspicuity at conventional sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 198:1438–1444. doi: 10.2214/ajr.11.7568 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mauri G, Cova L, De Beni S, et al. (2015) Real-time US-CT/MRI image fusion for guidance of thermal ablation of liver tumors undetectable with US: results in 295 cases. Cardiovasc Interv Radiol 38:143–151. doi: 10.1007/s00270-014-0897-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ewertsen C, Henriksen BM, Torp-Pedersen S, Bachmann Nielsen M (2011) Characterization by biopsy or CEUS of liver lesions guided by image fusion between ultrasonography and CT, PET/CT or MRI. Ultraschall Med 32:191–197. doi: 10.1055/s-0029-1245921 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Song KD, Lee MW, Rhim H, et al. (2013) Fusion imaging-guided radiofrequency ablation for hepatocellular carcinomas not visible on conventional ultrasound. AJR Am J Roentgenol 201:1141–1147. doi: 10.2214/AJR.13.10532 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Minami Y, Kudo M (2014) Ultrasound fusion imaging of hepatocellular carcinoma: a review of current evidence. Dig Dis 32:690–695. doi: 10.1159/000368001 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Liu FY, Yu XL, Liang P, et al. (2012) Microwave ablation assisted by a real-time virtual navigation system for hepatocellular carcinoma undetectable by conventional ultrasonography. Eur J Radiol 81:1455–1459. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.03.057 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    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 12:577–585. doi: 10.1016/j.media.2008.06.006 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    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 10:136–143PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nam WH, Kang DG, Lee D, Lee JY, Ra JB (2012) Automatic registration between 3D intra-operative ultrasound and pre-operative CT images of the liver based on robust edge matching. Phys Med Biol 57:69–91. doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/57/1/69 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mauri G, De Beni S, Forzoni L, et al. (2014) Virtual navigator automatic registration technology in abdominal application. In: Annual international conference of the IEEE engineering in medicine and biology society, pp 5570–5574. doi: 10.1109/EMBC.2014.6944889
  15. 15.
    Mintorovitch J, Shamsi K (2000) Eovist Injection and Resovist Injection: two new liver-specific contrast agents for MRI. Oncology (Williston Park) 14:37–40Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cha DI, Lee MW, Kim YK, et al. (2014) Assessing patients with hepatocellular carcinoma meeting the Milan criteria: is liver 3 tesla MR with gadoxetic acid necessary in addition to liver CT? J Magn Reson Imaging 39:842–852. doi: 10.1002/jmri.24237 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kim YK, Kim CS, Han YM, et al. (2009) Detection of hepatocellular carcinoma: gadoxetic acid-enhanced 3-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging versus multi-detector row computed tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 33:844–850. doi: 10.1097/RCT.0b013e3181a7e3c7 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kunishi Y, Numata K, Morimoto M, et al. (2012) Efficacy of fusion imaging combining sonography and hepatobiliary phase MRI with Gd-EOB-DTPA to detect small hepatocellular carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 198:106–114. doi: 10.2214/ajr.10.6039 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kim AY, Lee MW, Cha DI, et al. (2016) Automatic registration between real-time ultrasonography and pre-procedural magnetic resonance images: a prospective comparison between two registration methods by liver surface and vessel and by liver surface only. Ultrasound Med Biol 42:1627–1636CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bruix J, Sherman M, American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (2011) Management of hepatocellular carcinoma: an update. Hepatology 53:1020–1022.  10.1002/hep.24199
  21. 21.
    Lee MW, Kim YJ, Park HS, et al. (2010) Targeted sonography for small hepatocellular carcinoma discovered by CT or MRI: factors affecting sonographic detection. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194:W396–W400. doi: 10.2214/ajr.09.3171 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lee MW, Lim HK, Kim YJ, et al. (2011) Percutaneous sonographically guided radio frequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma: causes of mistargeting and factors affecting the feasibility of a second ablation session. J Ultrasound Med 30:607–615CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lee MW (2014) Fusion imaging of real-time ultrasonography with CT or MRI for hepatic intervention. Ultrasonography 33:227–239. doi: 10.14366/usg.14021 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ahmed M, Solbiati L, Brace CL, et al. (2014) Image-guided tumor ablation: standardization of terminology and reporting criteria—a 10-year update. Radiology 273:241–260. doi: 10.1148/radiol.14132958 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kadoury S, Zagorchev L, Wood BJ, et al. (2012) A model-based registration approach of preoperative MRI with 3D ultrasound of the liver for Interventional guidance procedures. In: 2012 9th IEEE international symposium on biomedical imaging (ISBI), 2012, pp 952–955Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dong Ik Cha
    • 1
  • Min Woo Lee
    • 1
    Email author
  • Kyoung Doo Song
    • 1
  • Young-Taek Oh
    • 2
  • Ja-Yeon Jeong
    • 2
  • Jung-Woo Chang
    • 2
  • Jiwon Ryu
    • 2
  • Kyong Joon Lee
    • 2
  • Jaeil Kim
    • 2
  • Won-Chul Bang
    • 2
  • Dong Kuk Shin
    • 3
  • Sung Jin Choi
    • 3
  • Dalkwon Koh
    • 3
  • Bong Koo Seo
    • 3
  • Kyunga Kim
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical CenterSungkyunkwan University School of MedicineSeoulSouth Korea
  2. 2.Medical Imaging R&D Group, Health & Medical Equipment BusinessSamsung Electronics Co., Ltd.SeoulSouth Korea
  3. 3.Infrastructure Technology Lab, R&D CenterSamsung MedisonSeoulSouth Korea
  4. 4.Biostatistics and Clinical Epidemiology CenterSamsung Medical CenterSeoulSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations