Advertisement

Image Registration for Interventional MRI Guided Procedures: Interpolation Methods, Similarity Measurements, and Applications to the Prostate

  • Baowei Fei
  • Zhenghong Lee
  • Jeffery L. Duerk
  • David L. Wilson
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2717)

Abstract

Nuclear medicine can detect and localize tumor in the prostate not reliably seen in MR. We are investigating methods to combine the advantages of SPECT with interventional MRI (iMRI) guided radiofrequency thermal ablation of the prostate. Our approach is to first register the low-resolution functional images with a high resolution MR volume. Then, by combining the high-resolution MR image with live-time iMRI acquisitions, we can, in turn, include the functional data and high-resolution anatomic information into the iMRI system for improved tumor targeting. In this study, we investigated registration methods for combining noisy, thick iMRI image slices with high-resolution MR volumes. We compared three similarity measures, i.e., normalized mutual information, mutual information, and correlation coefficient; and three interpolation methods, i.e., re-normalized sinc, tri-linear, and nearest neighbor. Registration experiments showed that transverse slice images covering the prostate work best with a registration error of ≈ 0.5 mm as compared to our volume-to-volume registration that was previously shown to be quite accurate for these image pairs.

Keywords

Mutual Information Interpolation Method Image Registration Normalize Mutual Information Registration Error 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Sodee, D.B., Malguria, N., Faulhaber, P., Resnick, M.I., Albert, J., Bakale, G.: Multicenter ProstaScint imaging findings in 2154 patients with prostate cancer. Urology 56, 988–993 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lee, Z., Sodee, D.B., Duerk, J.L., Nelson, A.D., Berridge, M.S.: Automatic registration of SPECT-MRI in the pelvis. Journal of Nuclear Medicine 41, 232 (2000)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fei, B.W., Duerk, J.L., Wilson, D.L.: Automatic 3D Registration for Interventional MRIGuided Treatment of Prostate Cancer. Computer Aided Surgery 7, 257–267 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fei, B.W., Duerk, J.L., Boll, D.T., Lewin, J.S., Wilson, D.L.: Slice to volume registration and its potential application tointerventional MRI guided radiofrequency thermal ablation of prostate cancer. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 22 (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Thacker, N.A., Jackson, A., Moriarty, D., Vokurka, E.: Improved quality of re-sliced MR images using re-normalized sinc interpolation. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging 10, 582–588 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hajnal, J.V., Saeed, N., Soar, E.J., Oatridge, A., Young, I.R., Bydder, G.: A registration and interpolation procedure for subvoxel matching of serially acquired MR images. Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography 19, 289–296 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Collignon, A., Maes, F., Delaere, D., Vandermeulen, D., Suetens, P., Marchal, G.: Automated multimodality image registration using information theory. In: Information Processing in Medical Imaging: Proc. 14th International Conference IPMI 1995. Computational Imaging and Vision, pp. 287–298 (1995)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Maes, F., Collignon, A., Vandermeulen, D., Marchal, G., Suetens, P.: Multimodality image registration by maximization of mutual information. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 16, 187–198 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Press, W.H., Teukolsky, S.A., Vellerling, W.T., Flannery, B.P.: Numerical Recipes in C: The Art of Scientific Computing, 2nd edn. The Press Syndicate of the Cambridge University, New York (1992)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fei, B.W., Wheaton, A., Lee, Z., Duerk, J.L., Wilson, D.L.: Automatic MR volume registration and its evaluation for the pelvis and prostate. Physics in Medicine and Biology 47, 823–838 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pluim, J.P.W., Maintz, J.B.A., Viergever, M.A.: Image registration by maximization of combined mutual information and gradient information. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 19, 809–814 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nelder, J., Mead, R.A.: A simplex method for function minimization. Computer Journal 7, 308–313 (1965)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Macovski, A.: Noise in MRI. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 36, 494–497 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gregg, R.C., Nowak, R.D.: Noise removal methods for high resolution MRI. IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium 2, 1117–1121 (1997)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Baowei Fei
    • 1
  • Zhenghong Lee
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jeffery L. Duerk
    • 1
    • 2
  • David L. Wilson
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Biomedical EngineeringCase Western Reserve UniversityClevelandUSA
  2. 2.Department of RadiologyUniversity Hospitals of ClevelandClevelandUSA

Personalised recommendations