Multi-slice-to-volume registration for MRI-guided transperineal prostate biopsy

  • Helen XuEmail author
  • Andras Lasso
  • Andriy Fedorov
  • Kemal Tuncali
  • Clare Tempany
  • Gabor Fichtinger
Original Article



Prostate needle biopsy is a commonly performed procedure since it is the most definitive form of cancer diagnosis. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) allows target-specific biopsies to be performed. However, needle placements are often inaccurate due to intra-operative prostate motion and the lack of motion compensation techniques. This paper detects and determines the extent of tissue displacement during an MRI-guided biopsy so that the needle insertion plan can be adjusted accordingly.


A multi-slice-to-volume registration algorithm was developed to align the pre-operative planning image volume with three intra-operative orthogonal image slices of the prostate acquired immediately before needle insertion. The algorithm consists of an initial rigid transformation followed by a deformable step.


A total of 14 image sets from 10 patients were studied. Based on prostate contour alignment, the registrations were accurate to within 2 mm.


This algorithm can be used to increase the needle targeting accuracy by alerting the clinician if the biopsy target has moved significantly prior to needle insertion. The proposed method demonstrated feasibility of intra-operative target localization and motion compensation for MRI-guided prostate biopsy.


Prostate biopsy Target localization  MRI-guidance Image registration 



The authors would like to thank Janice Fairhurst, MR technologist from Advanced Multi-modality Image Guided Operating (AMIGO) Suite in Brigham and Women’s Hospital for the image data collection.

Conflict of interest



  1. 1.
    American Cancer Society (2012) Cancer facts and figures. Accessed 9 Jan 2013
  2. 2.
    Tempany C, Straus S, Hata N, Haker S (2008) MR-guided prostate interventions. J Magn Reson Imaging 27:356–367CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kronz J, Allan C, Shaikh A, Epstein J (2001) Predicting cancer following a diagnosis of high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia on needle biopsy: data on men with more than one follow-up biopsy. Am J Surg Pathol 25(8):1079–1085CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Norberg M, Egevad L, Holmberg L, Sparen P, Norlen B, Busch C (1997) The sextant protocol for ultrasound-guided core biopsies of the prostate underestimates the presence of cancer. Urology 50(4):562–566CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Terris M, Wallen E, Stamey T (1997) Comparison of mid-lobe versus lateral systematic sextant biopsies in detection of prostate cancer. Urol Int 59:239–242CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Terris M (2009) Strategies for repeat prostate biopsies. Curr Urol Rep 10(3):172–178CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pondman K, Futterer J, Haken BT, Kool L, Witjes J, Hambrock T, Macura K, Barentsz J (2008) MR-guided biopsy of the prostate: an overview of techniques and a systematic review. Eur Urol 54(3):517–527CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hata N, Jinzaki M, Kacher D, Cormak R, Gering D, Nabavi A, Silverman S, D’Amico A, Kikinis R, Jolesz F, Tempany C (2001) MR imaging-guided prostate biopsy with surgical navigation software: device validation and feasibility. Radiology 220(1):263–268CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fedorov A, Tuncali K, Penzkofer T, Tokuda J, Song S, Hata N, Tempany C (2013) Quantification of intra-procedural gland motion during transperineal MRI-guided prostate biopsy. In: International society for magnetic resonance in medicine (ISMRM) 21st annual meeting (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Xu H, Lasso A, Guion P, Krieger A, Kaushal A, Singh A, Pinto P, Coleman J, Grubb RL III, Lattouf JB, Menard C, Whitcomb LL, Fichtinger G (2013) Accuracy analysis in MRI-guided robotic prostate biopsy. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 8(6):937–944 Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ploussard G, Epstein J, Montironi R, Carroll P, Wirth M, Grimm M, Bjartell A, Montorsi F, Freedland S, Erbersdobler A, van der Kwast T (2011) The contemporary concept of significant versus insignificant prostate cancer. Eur Urol 60:291–303CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fei B, Duerk J, Boll D, Lewin J, Wilson DL (2003) Slice-to-volume registration and its potential application to interventional MRI-guided radio-frequency thermal ablation of prostate cancer. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 22(4):515–525CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gill S, Abolmaesumi P, Vikal S (2008) Intraoperative prostate tracking with slice-to-volume registration in MR. In: 20th International Conference of the Society for Medical Innovation and Technology (2008), pp 154–158Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tadayyon H, Lasso A, Kaushal A, Guion P, Fichtinger G (2011) Target motion tracking in MRI-guided transrectal robotic prostate biopsy. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 58(11):3135–3142CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tokuda J, Tuncali K, Iordachita I, Song S, Fedorov A, Oguro S, Lasso A, Fennessy F, Tempany C, Hata N (2012) In-bore setup and software for 3T MRI-guided transperineal prostate biopsy. Phys Med Biol 57:5823–5840CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tustison N, Gee J, Insight J (2009) N4ITK: Nick’s N3 ITK implementation for MRI bias field correction. Accessed 9 Jan 2013
  17. 17.
    Yoo T, Ackerman M, Lorensen W, Schroeder W, Chalana V, Aylward S, Metaxes D, Whitaker R (2002) Engineering and algorithm design for an image processing API: a technical report on ITK—the insight toolkit. Stud Health Technol Inform 85:586–592PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pieper S, Halle M, Kikinis R (2004) 3D Slicer. In: IEEE international symposium on biomedical imaging: from nano to macro, pp 632–635Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shusharina N, Sharp G (2012) Analytic regularization for landmark-based image registration. Phys Med Biol 57(6):1477–1498CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© CARS 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Helen Xu
    • 1
    Email author
  • Andras Lasso
    • 1
  • Andriy Fedorov
    • 2
  • Kemal Tuncali
    • 2
  • Clare Tempany
    • 2
  • Gabor Fichtinger
    • 1
  1. 1.School of ComputingQueen’s UniversityKingstonCanada
  2. 2.Brigham and Women’s HospitalBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations