A Communication Term for the Combined Registration and Segmentation

  • Konstantin Ens
  • Jens von Berg
  • Bernd Fischer
Part of the IFMBE Proceedings book series (IFMBE, volume 22)


Accurate image registration is a necessary prerequisite for many diagnostic and therapy planning procedures where complementary information from different images has to be combined. The design of robust and reliable non-parametric registration schemes is currently a very active research area. Modern approaches combine the pure registration scheme with other image processing routines such that both ingredients may benefit from each other. One of the new approaches is the combination of segmentation and registration (“segistration”). Here, the segmentation part guides the registration to its desired configuration, whereas on the other hand the registration leads to an automatic segmentation. By joining these image processing methods it is possible to overcome some of the pitfalls of the individual methods. Here, we focus on the benefits for the registration task.

To combine segmentation and registration, a special communication or coupling term is needed. In this note we present a novel coupling term, which overcomes the pitfalls of conventional ones. It turned out that not only the achieved results were better, but the overall scheme converges much faster, resulting in a favorable computation time.

The performance tests were carried out for magnetic resonance (MR) images of the brain demonstrating the striking the potential of the proposed method for real live examples.


segistration medical image registration segmentation mathematical modeling magnet resonance imaging neuro-imaging 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Modersitzki J (2003) Numerical methods for image registration. Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Broit C (1981) Optimal registration of deformed images. PhD thesis, Computer and information science, University of PennsilvaniaGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kass M, Witkin A, Terzopoulos D (1987) Snakes: Active contour models. Internationa journal of computer vision 1, pp 321–331Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Moumford D, Shah J (1989) Optimal approximation by piecewise smooth functions and associated variational problems. Comm pure appl. Math 42Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chan T, Vese L (1999) An active contour model without edges. Scale-space LNCSGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Liu J, Wang Y, liu J (2006) A unified framework for segmentation-assisted image registration. ACCV, 2, pp 405–414Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Unal C, Slabaugh G (2005) Coupled PDEs for non-rigid registration and segmentation. CVPRGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wang F, Vemuri B C (2005) Simultaneous registration and segmentation of anatomical structures from brain MRI. MICCAI, pp 17–25Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Malladi R, Sethian J A (2002) A general framework for low level vision fast methods for shape extraction in medical and biomedical imaging. Springer verlag 1–13Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Konstantin Ens
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jens von Berg
    • 2
  • Bernd Fischer
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of MathematicsUniversity of LuebeckLuebeckGermany
  2. 2.Philips Research EuropeHamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations