A New Image Registration Technique with Free Boundary Constraints: Application to Mammography

  • F. Richard
  • L. Cohen
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2353)


In this paper, a new image-matching mathematical model is presented for the mammogram registration. In avariational framework, an energy minimization problem is formulated and a multigrid resolution algorithm is designed. The model focuses on the matching of regions of interest. It also combines several constraints which are both intensity and segmentation based. A new feature of our model is combining region matching and segmentation by formulation of the energy minimization problem with free boundary conditions. Moreover, the energy has a new registration constraint. The performances of models with and without free boundary are compared on a simulated mammogram pair. It is shown that the new model with free boundary is more robust to initialization inaccuracies than the one without. The interest of the new model for the real mammogram registration is also illustrated.


Free Boundary Image Registration Free Boundary Condition Wrong Initialization Geometric Deformation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    R. Bajcsy and S. Kovacic. Multiresolution elastic matching. CVGIP, 46:1–21, 1989.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    F.L. Bookstein. Principal warps: thin-plate splines and the decomposition of deformations. IEEEPAMI, 11(6):567–585, 1989.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    G.E. Christensen, R.D. Rabbitt, and M.I. Miller. Mathematical textbook of deformable neu-roanatomies. In Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., USA, volume 90, pages 11944–11948, dec 93.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    P. Ciarlet. The finite element method for elliptic problems. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1978.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    P. Ciarlet. Mathematical elasticity, volume 1: three-dimensional elasticity. Studies in Mathematics and its Applications. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1988.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    N. Karssemeijer and G.M. te Brake. Combining single view features and asymmetry for detection of mass lesions. In N. Karssemeijer et al., editors, Proc. IWDM, pages 95–102, Nijmegen, The Netherlands, June 1998. Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    T.K. Lau and W.F. Bischof. Automated detection of breast tumors using the asymmetry approach. Comput. Biomed. Res., 24(3):273–295, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. Lefebure and L. Cohen. Image registration, optical flow and local rigidity. JMIV, 14(2), mar 2001.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. Maintz and M.A. Viergever. A survey of medical image registration. Medical Image Analysis, 2(1):1–36, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    K. Marias and J.M. Brady. Multi-scale landmark selection for improved registration of temporal mammograms. In M. Yaffe, editor, Proc. IWDM, pages 580–586, Toronto, Canada, June 2000. Medical Physics Publishing.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    F. Richard. Modèles’ elastiques d’ajustements d’images et applications aux paires bilat’ erales et temporelles de mammographies. PhD thesis, Université Paris V, France, dec 2000.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    F. Richard and C. Graffigne. An image-matching model for the registration of temporal or bilateral mammogram pairs. In M. Yaffe, editor, IWDM, pages 756–762, Toronto, Canada, June 2000. Medical Physics.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    M. Sallam and K. Bowyer. Detecting abnormal densities in mammograms by comparison to previous screenings. In K. Doi et al., editors, Proc. IWDM, pages 417–420, Chicago, USA, June 1996. Elsevier Science.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    M.Y Sallam and K. Bowyer. Registering time sequences of mammograms using a two-dimensional image unwarping technique. In A.G. Gale et al., editors, Proc. IWDM, pages 121–130, York, England, July 1994. Elsevier Science.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    M.Y. Sallam and K. Bowyer. Registration and difference analysis of corresponding mammogram images. Medical Image Analysis, 3(2): 103–118, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    J.L. Semmlow, A. Shadagopappan, L.V. Ackerman, et al. A fully automated system for screening Xeromammograms. Comput. Biomed. Res., 13:350–362, 1980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    A. Stamatakis, A.Y. Cairns, I.W. Ricketts, et al. A novel approach to aligning mammograms. In A. Gale et al., editors, Proc. IWDM, pages 355–364, England, jul 1994. Elsevier Science.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    J. Suckling, J. Parker, D.R. Dance, et al. The Mammographic Image Analysis Society digital mammogram database. In A.G. Gale et al., editors, Proc. IWDM, York, England, July 1994.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    A. Witkin, T. Terzopoulos, and M. Kass. Signal matching through scale space. IJCV, 1(2): 133–144, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • F. Richard
    • 1
  • L. Cohen
    • 2
  1. 1.MAP5University Paris V René DescartesParis Cedex 06France
  2. 2.CEREMADEUniversity Paris IX DauphineParis cedex 16France

Personalised recommendations