Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Acceptance Test of a Commercially Available Software for Automatic Image Registration of Computed Tomography (CT), Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) And 99mTc-methoxyisobutylisonitrile (MIBI) Single-Photon Emission Computed Tomography (SPECT) Brain Images

  • Published:
Journal of Digital Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This note describes a method to characterize the performances of image fusion software (Syntegra) with respect to accuracy and robustness. Computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) studies were acquired from two phantoms and 10 patients. Image registration was performed independently by two couples composed of one radiotherapist and one physicist by means of superposition of anatomic landmarks. Each couple performed jointly and saved the registration. The two solutions were averaged to obtain the gold standard registration. A new set of estimators was defined to identify translation and rotation errors in the coordinate axes, independently from point position in image field of view (FOV). Algorithms evaluated were local correlation (LC) for CT-MRI, normalized mutual information (MI) for CT-MRI, and CT-SPECT registrations. To evaluate accuracy, estimator values were compared to limiting values for the algorithms employed, both in phantoms and in patients. To evaluate robustness, different alignments between images taken from a sample patient were produced and registration errors determined. LC algorithm resulted accurate in CT-MRI registrations in phantoms, but exceeded limiting values in 3 of 10 patients. MI algorithm resulted accurate in CT-MRI and CT-SPECT registrations in phantoms; limiting values were exceeded in one case in CT-MRI and never reached in CT-SPECT registrations. Thus, the evaluation of robustness was restricted to the algorithm of MI both for CT-MRI and CT-SPECT registrations. The algorithm of MI proved to be robust: limiting values were not exceeded with translation perturbations up to 2.5 cm, rotation perturbations up to 10° and roto-translational perturbation up to 3 cm and 5°.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Hajnal JV, Hill DLG, Hawkes DJ: Medical Image Registration. CRC Press, 2001

  2. Hill DL, Batchelor PG, Holden M, Hawkes DJ: Medical image registration. Phys Med Biol 46:R1–R45, 2001

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Hutton BF, Braun M: Software for image registration: algorithms, accuracy, efficacy. Semin Nucl Med 23:180–192, 2003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Pluim JP, Maintz JB, Viergever MA: Mutual-information-based registration of medical images: a survey. IEEE Trans Med Imag 22:986–1004, 2003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Sykes JR, Amer A, Czajka J, Moore CJ: A feasibility study for image guided radiotherapy using low dose, high speed, cone beam X-ray volumetric imaging. Radiother Oncol 77:45–52, 2005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Junk L, Moen JG, Hutchins GD, Brown MB, Juhl DE: Correlation methods for the centering, rotation and alignment of functional brain images. J Nucl Med 31:1220–1226, 1990

    Google Scholar 

  7. Andersson JLR, Sundin A, Valind S: A method for coregistration of PET and MRI brain images. J Nucl Med 36:1307–1315, 1995

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Rizzo G, Pasquali P, Gilardi MC: Multimodality biomedical image integration: use of cross-correlation technique. Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 13:219–220, 1991

    Google Scholar 

  9. Studholme C, Hill DLG, Hawkes DJ: An overlap invariant entropy measure of 3D medical image alignment. Pattern Recogn 32:71–86, 1998

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Maes F, Collignon A: Multimodality image registration by maximization of mutual information. IEEE Trans Med Imag 16:187–198, 1997

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Mutic S, Dempsey JF, Bosch WR, Low DA, Drzymala RE, Chao KS, Goddu SM, Cutler PD, Purdy JA: Multimodality image registration quality assurance for conformal three-dimensional treatment planning. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 51:255–260, 2001

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Lavely WC, Scarfone C, Cevikalp H, Li R, Byrne DW, Cmelak AJ, Dawant B, Price RR, Hallahan DE, Fitzpatrick JM: Phantom validation of coregistration of PET and CT for image-guided radiotherapy. Med Phys 31:1083–1092, 2004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Moore CS, Liney GP, Beavis AW: Quality assurance of registration of CT and MRI data sets for treatment planning of radiotherapy for head and neck cancers. J Appl Clin Med Phys 5:25–35, 2004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Pfluger T, Vollmar C, Wismuller A, Dresel S, Berger F, Suntheim P, Leinsinger G, Hahn K: Quantitative comparison of automatic and interactive methods for MRI-SPECT image registration of the brain based on 3-dimensional calculation of error. J Nucl Med 41:1823–1829, 2000

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Pietrzyk U, Herholz K, Fink G, Jacobs A, Mielke R, Slansky I, Wurker M, Heiss WD: An interactive technique for three-dimensional image registration: validation for PET, SPECT, MRI and CT brain studies. J Nucl Med 35:2011–2018, 1994

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Hays, WL: Statistics, 4th edition. Fort Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehart and Winston Inc, 1988

    Google Scholar 

  17. Fizpatrick JM: Handbook of medical imaging, Volume 2: medical image processing and analysis, chapter 6. Bellingham, WA: SPIE press, 2000

    Google Scholar 

  18. Maurer CR, Aboutanos GB, Dawant BM, Maciunas RJ, Fitzpatrick JM: Registration of 3-D images using weighted geometrical features. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 15:836–849, 1996

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. West J, et al.: Comparison and evaluation of retrospective intermodality brain image registration techniques. J Comput Assist Tomogr 21:554–566, 1997

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Annals of the ICRP: Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection, ICRP Publication 26, 1977

  21. Wong JC, Studholme C, Hawkes DJ, Maisey MN: Evaluation of the limits of visual detection of image misregistration in a brain fluorine-18fluorodeoxyglucose PET-MRI study. Eur J Nucl Med 24:642–650, 1997

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Brambilla M, Secco C, Dominietto M, Matheoud R, Sacchetti G, Inglese E: Performance characteristics obtained for a new 3-dimensional lutetium oxyorthosilicate-based whole-Body PET/CT scanner with the National Electrical Manufacturers Association NU 2-2001standard. J Nucl Med 46:2083–2091, 2005

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marco Brambilla Ph.D..

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Loi, G., Dominietto, M., Manfredda, I. et al. Acceptance Test of a Commercially Available Software for Automatic Image Registration of Computed Tomography (CT), Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) And 99mTc-methoxyisobutylisonitrile (MIBI) Single-Photon Emission Computed Tomography (SPECT) Brain Images. J Digit Imaging 21, 329–337 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-007-9042-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-007-9042-7

Key words

Navigation