Inverse-Consistent Symmetric Free Form Deformation

  • Marc Modat
  • M. Jorge Cardoso
  • Pankaj Daga
  • David Cash
  • Nick C. Fox
  • Sébastien Ourselin
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7359)

Abstract

Bias in image registration has to be accounted for when performing morphometric studies. The presence of bias can lead to unrealistic power estimates and can have an adverse effect in group separation studies. Most image registration algorithms are formulated in an asymmetric fashion and the solution is biased towards the transformation direction. The popular free-form deformation algorithm has been shown to be a robust and accurate method for medical image registration. However, it suffers from the lack of symmetry which could potentially bias the result. This work presents a symmetric and inverse-consistent variant of the free form deformation.

We first assess the proposed framework in the context of segmentation-propagation. We also applied it to longitudinal images to assess regional volume change. In both evaluations, the symmetric algorithm outperformed a non-symmetric formulation of the free-form deformation.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Boyes, R., Rueckert, D., Aljabar, P., Whitwell, J., Schott, J., Hill, D., Fox, N.: Cerebral atrophy measurements using Jacobian integration: Comparison with the boundary shift integral. Neuroimage 32(1), 159–169 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Avants, B.B., Epstein, C.L., Grossman, M., Gee, J.C.: Symmetric diffeomorphic image registration with cross-correlation: evaluating automated labeling of elderly and neurodegenerative brain. Medical Image Analysis 12(1), 26–41 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tao, G., He, R., Datta, S., Narayana, P.A.: Symmetric inverse consistent nonlinear registration driven by mutual information. Comput. Meth. Prog. Bio. 95(2), 105–115 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vercauteren, T., Pennec, X., Perchant, A., Ayache, N.: Symmetric Log-Domain Diffeomorphic Registration: A Demons-Based Approach. In: Metaxas, D., Axel, L., Fichtinger, G., Székely, G. (eds.) MICCAI 2008, Part I. LNCS, vol. 5241, pp. 754–761. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Thompson, W.K., Holland, D., Initiative, A.D.N.: Bias in tensor based morphometry stat-ROI measures result in unrealistic power estimates. NeuroImage 57(1), 1–4 (2011); discussion 5–14Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hua, X., Gutman, B., Boyle, C.P., Rajagopalan, P., Leow, A.D., Yanovsky, I., Kumar, A.R., Toga, A.W., Jack, C.R., Schuff, N., Alexander, G.E., Chen, K., Reiman, E.M., Weiner, M.W., Thompson, P.M.: Accurate measurement of brain changes in longitudinal MRI scans using tensor-based morphometry. NeuroImage 57(1), 5–14 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fox, N.C., Ridgway, G.R., Schott, J.M.: Algorithms, atrophy and Alzheimer’s disease: cautionary tales for clinical trials. NeuroImage 57(1), 15–18 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rueckert, D., Sonoda, L., Hayes, C., Hill, D., Leach, M., Hawkes, D.: Nonrigid registration using free-form deformations: Application to breast MR images. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 18(8), 712–721 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Klein, A., Andersson, J., Ardekani, B., Ashburner, J., Avants, B., Chiang, M., Christensen, G., Collins, D., Gee, J., Hellier, P., et al.: Evaluation of 14 nonlinear deformation algorithms applied to human brain MRI registration 46(3), 786–802 (July 2009)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rohlfing, T., Maurer Jr., C.R., Bluemke, D.A., Jacobs, M.A.: Volume-preserving nonrigid registration of MR breast images using free-form deformation with an incompressibility constraints. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 22(6), 730–741 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rueckert, D., Aljabar, P., Heckemann, R.A., Hajnal, J.V., Hammers, A.: Diffeomorphic Registration Using B-Splines. In: Larsen, R., Nielsen, M., Sporring, J. (eds.) MICCAI 2006, Part II. LNCS, vol. 4191, pp. 702–709. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sdika, M.: A fast nonrigid image registration with constraints on the Jacobian using large scale constrained optimization. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 27(2), 271–281 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Feng, W., Reeves, S., Denney, T., Lloyd, S., Dell’Italia, L., Gupta, H.: A new consistent image registration formulation with a b-spline deformation model. In: Rosen, B., Brooks, D. (eds.) IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging: From Nano to Macro, pp. 979–982 (2009)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Christensen, G.E., Johnson, H.J.: Consistent image registration. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 20(7), 568–582 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ashburner, J., Friston, K.J.: Nonlinear spatial normalization using basis functions. Hum. Brain Mapp. 7(4) (June 1999)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mattes, D., Haynor, D.R., Vesselle, H., Lewellen, T.K., Eubank, W.: PET-CT image registration in the chest using free-form deformations. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 22(1), 120–128 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Modat, M., Ridgway, G.R., Taylor, Z.A., Lehmann, M., Barnes, J., Hawkes, D.J., Fox, N.C., Ourselin, S.: Fast free-form deformation using graphics processing units. Comput. Meth. Prog. Bio. 98(3), 278–284 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Modat, M., Ridgway, G.R., Daga, P., Cardoso, M.J., Ashburner, J., Ourselin, S.: Parametric non-rigid registration using a stationary velocity field. In: Zhou, S.K., Duncan, J.S., Ourselin, S. (eds.) IEEE Workshop on Mathematical Methods in Biomedical Image Analysis, MMBIA (2012)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shattuck, D., Mirza, M., Adisetiyo, V., Hojatkashani, C., Salamon, G., Narr, K., Poldrack, R., Bilder, R., Toga, A.: Construction of a 3D probabilistic atlas of human cortical structures 39(3), 1064–1080 (February 2008)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ourselin, S., Roche, A., Subsol, G., Pennec, X., Ayache, N.: Reconstructing a 3D structure from serial histological sections. Image and Vision Computing 19(1-2), 25–31 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yushkevich, P.A., Avants, B.B., Das, S.R., Pluta, J., Altinay, M., Craige, C., Initiative, A.D.N.: Bias in estimation of hippocampal atrophy using deformation-based morphometry arises from asymmetric global normalization: an illustration in ADNI 3 T MRI data. NeuroImage 50(2), 434–445 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marc Modat
    • 1
  • M. Jorge Cardoso
    • 1
  • Pankaj Daga
    • 1
  • David Cash
    • 2
  • Nick C. Fox
    • 2
  • Sébastien Ourselin
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Centre for Medical Imaging Computing, Department of Medical Physics, and BioengineeringUniversity College LondonUK
  2. 2.Dementia Research Centre, Institute of NeurologyUniversity College LondonUK

Personalised recommendations