Deformable registration of preoperative MR, pre-resection ultrasound, and post-resection ultrasound images of neurosurgery
- 363 Downloads
Sites that use ultrasound (US) in image-guided neurosurgery (IGNS) of brain tumors generally have three sets of imaging data: preoperative magnetic resonance (MR) image, pre-resection US, and post-resection US. The MR image is usually acquired days before the surgery, the pre-resection US is obtained after the craniotomy but before the resection, and finally, the post-resection US scan is performed after the resection of the tumor. The craniotomy and tumor resection both cause brain deformation, which significantly reduces the accuracy of the MR–US alignment.
Three unknown transformations exist between the three sets of imaging data: MR to pre-resection US, pre- to post-resection US, and MR to post-resection US. We use two algorithms that we have recently developed to perform the first two registrations (i.e., MR to pre-resection US and pre- to post-resection US). Regarding the third registration (MR to post-resection US), we evaluate three strategies. The first method performs a registration between the MR and pre-resection US, and another registration between the pre- and post-resection US. It then composes the two transformations to register MR and post-resection US; we call this method compositional registration. The second method ignores the pre-resection US and directly registers the MR and post-resection US; we refer to this method as direct registration. The third method is a combination of the first and second: it uses the solution of the compositional registration as an initial solution for the direct registration method. We call this method group-wise registration.
We use data from 13 patients provided in the MNI BITE database for all of our analysis. Registration of MR and pre-resection US reduces the average of the mean target registration error (mTRE) from 4.1 to 2.4 mm. Registration of pre- and post-resection US reduces the average mTRE from 3.7 to 1.5 mm. Regarding the registration of MR and post-resection US, all three strategies reduce the mTRE. The initial average mTRE is 5.9 mm, which reduces to 3.3 mm with the compositional method, 2.9 mm with the direct technique, and 2.8 mm with the group-wise method.
Deformable registration of MR and pre- and post-resection US images significantly improves their alignment. Among the three methods proposed for registering the MR to post-resection US, the group-wise method gives the lowest TRE values. Since the running time of all registration algorithms is less than 2 min on one core of a CPU, they can be integrated into IGNS systems for interactive use during surgery.
KeywordsNon-rigid registration Intra-operative ultrasound Brain surgery Image-guided neurosurgery IGNS
The authors would like to thank anonymous reviewers for their constructive feedback. This work was financed by the Fonds Québécois de la recherche sur la nature et les technologies, the Canadian Institute of Health Research (MOP-97820), and the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada. H. Rivaz is supported by a postdoctoral fellowship from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.
Conflict of interest
- 3.Ji S, Fan X, Hartov A, Roberts DW, Paulsen KD (2012) Estimation of intraoperative brain deformation. In: Soft tissue biomechanical modeling for computer assisted surgery. Springer, New York, pp 97–133Google Scholar
- 4.Kuhnt D, Bauer MH, Nimsky C (2012) Brain shift compensation and neurosurgical image fusion using intraoperative MRI: current status and future challenges. Crit Rev Biomed Eng 40(3):175–185Google Scholar
- 7.Truwit C, Martin AJ, Hall WA (2012) MRI guidance of minimally invasive cranial applications. In: Interventional magnetic resonance imaging. Springer, New York, pp 97–112Google Scholar
- 9.Czyż M, Tabakow P, Weiser A, Lechowicz-Głogowska B, Zub L, Jarmundowicz W (2014) The safety and effectiveness of low field intraoperative mri guidance in frameless stereotactic biopsies of brain tumoursdesign and interim analysis of a prospective randomized trial. Neurosurg Rev 37(1):127–137PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Sommer B, Grummich P, Coras R, Kasper BS, Blumcke I, Hamer HM, Stefan H, Buchfelder M, Roessler K (2013) Integration of functional neuronavigation and intraoperative mri in surgery for drug-resistant extratemporal epilepsy close to eloquent brain areas. Neurosurg Focus 34(4):E4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Black P, Jolesz FA, Medani K (2011) From vision to reality: the origins of intraoperative mr imaging. In: Intraoperative imaging. Springer, New York, pp 3–7Google Scholar
- 14.Letteboer M, Willems P, Viergever M, Niessen W (2005) Brain shift estimation in image-guided neurosurgery using 3-d ultrasound. IEEE Trans Med Imag 52:267–276Google Scholar
- 17.Ji S, Fan X, Roberts DW, Hartov A, Paulsen KD (2011) Optimizing nonrigid registration performance between volumetric true 3d ultrasound images in image-guided neurosurgery. In: SPIE medical imaging. International Society for Optics and Photonics, pp 79640V–79640VGoogle Scholar
- 19.Mercier L, Fonov V, Haegelen C, Maesstro R, Petrecca K, Collins DL (2012) Comparing two approaches to rigid registration of three-dimensional ultrasound and magnetic resonance images for neurosurgery. Compt Aided Surg 7(1):125–136Google Scholar
- 23.Fan X, Ji S, Fontaine K, Hartov A, Roberts D, Paulsen K (2011) Simulation of brain tumor resection in image-guided neurosurgery. In: SPIE medical imaging. International society for optics and photonics, pp 79640U–79640UGoogle Scholar
- 24.Fan X, Ji S, Hartov A, Roberts D, Paulsen K (2013) Retractor-induced brain shift compensation in image-guided neurosurgery. In: SPIE medical imaging. International Society for Optics and Photonics, pp 86710K–86710KGoogle Scholar
- 26.Rivaz H, Collins DL (2014) Near real-time robust nonrigid registration of volumetric ultrasound images for neurosurgery. Ultrasound Med Biol. doi: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2014.08.013
- 27.Rivaz H, Chen S, Collins DL (2014) Automatic deformable mr-ultrasound registration for image-guided neurosurgery. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. doi: 10.1109/TMI.2014.2354352
- 28.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 Imag 20(72):291–237Google Scholar
- 31.Kuklisova-Murgasova M, Cifor A, Napolitano R, Papageorghiou A, Quaghebeur G, Rutherford MA, Hajnal JV, Alison Noble J, Schnabel JA (2013) Registration of 3d fetal neurosonography and mri. Med Image Anal 17(8):1137–1150Google Scholar
- 35.Brooks R, Collins DL, Morandi X, Arbel T (2008) Deformable ultrasound registration without reconstruction. In: Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention-MICCAI 2008. Springer, New York, pp 1023–1031Google Scholar
- 37.Kybic J, Unser M (2003) Fast parametric elastic image registration. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 12:1427–1442Google Scholar
- 39.Jannin P, Fitzpatrick JM, Hawkes DJ, Pennec X, Shahidi R, Vannier MW (2002) Validation of medical image processing in image-guided therapy. Neurosurgery 21(2):1445–1449Google Scholar