Registration of MR to Percutaneous Ultrasound of the Spine for Image-Guided Surgery

  • Lars Eirik BøEmail author
  • Rafael Palomar
  • Tormod Selbekk
  • Ingerid Reinertsen
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computational Vision and Biomechanics book series (LNCVB, volume 17)


One of the main limitations of today’s navigation systems for spine surgery is that they often are not available until after the bone surface has been exposed. Also, they lack the capability of soft tissue imaging, both preoperatively and intraoperatively. The use of ultrasound has been proposed to overcome these limitations. By registering preoperative magnetic resonance (MR) images to intraoperative percutaneous ultrasound images, navigation can start even before incision. We therefore present a method for registration of MR images to ultrasound images of the spine. The method is feature-based and consists of two steps: segmentation of the bone surfaces from both the ultrasound images and the MR images, followed by rigid registration using a modified version of the Iterative Closest Point algorithm. The method was tested on data from a healthy volunteer, and the data set was successfully segmented and registered with an accuracy of \(3.67\pm 0.38\) mm.


Ultrasound Image Bone Surface Active Contour Iterative Close Point Unscented Kalman Filter 
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.



The work was funded through the user-driven research-based innovation project VIRTUS (The Research Council of Norway Grant No. 219326, SonoWand AS) and through a PhD grant from the Liaison Committee between the Central Norway Regional Health Authority (RHA) and the Norwegian University of Science and Technology.


  1. 1.
    Askeland, C., et al.: CustusX: A Research application for image-guided therapy. MIDAS J. 1–8 (2011). Systems and Architectures for Computer Assisted Interventions 2011.
  2. 2.
    Besl, P.J., et al.: A method for registration of 3-D shapes. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 14(2), 239–256 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fedorov, A., et al.: 3D slicer as an image computing platform for the quantitative imaging network. Magn. Reson. Imaging 30(9), 1323–1341 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Foroughi, P., et al.: Ultrasound bone segmentation using dynamic programming. In: Yuhas, M.P. (ed.) IEEE ultrasonics symposium on 2007, pp. 2523–2526 (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gao, Y., et al.: A 3D interactive multi-object segmentation tool using local robust statistics driven active contours. Med. Image Anal. 16(6), 1216–1227 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gill, S., et al.: Biomechanically constrained groupwise ultrasound to CT registration of the lumbar spine. Med. Image Anal. 16(3), 662–674 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jain, A.K., et al.: Understanding bone responses in B-mode ultrasound images and automatic bone surface extraction using a bayesian probabilistic framework. In: Walker, W.F., Emelianov, S.Y. (eds.) Medical Imaging 2004: Ultrasonic Imaging and Signal Processing, Proceedings of SPIE, vol. 5373, pp. 131–14 (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lang, A., et al.: Multi-modal registration of speckle-tracked freehand 3D ultrasound to CT in the lumbar spine. Med. Image Anal. 16(3), 675–686 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rasoulian, A., et al.: Feature-based multibody rigid registration of CT and ultrasound images of lumbar spine. Med. Phys. 39(6), 3154–3166 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Reinertsen, I., et al.: Validation of vessel-based registration for correction of brain shift. Med. Image Anal. 11(4), 374–388 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Solberg, O.V., et al.: 3D ultrasound reconstruction algorithms from analog and digital data. Ultrasonics 51(4), 405–419 (2011)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tjardes, T., et al.: Image-guided spine surgery: state of the art and future directions. Eur Spine J 19(1), 25–45 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tran, D., et al.: Automatic Detection of Lumbar Anatomy in Ultrasound Images of Human Subjects. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 57(9), 2248–2256 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Winter, S., et al.: Registration of CT and intraoperative 3-D ultrasound images of the spine using evolutionary and gradient-based methods. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 12(3), 284–296 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yan, C.X.B., et al.: Ultrasound-CT registration of vertebrae without reconstruction. Int. J. Comput. Assist. Radiol. Surg. 7(6), 901–909 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yushkevich, P.A., et al.: User-guided 3D active contour segmentation of anatomical structures: significantly improved efficiency and reliability. NeuroImage 31(3), 1116–1128 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lars Eirik Bø
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    Email author
  • Rafael Palomar
    • 4
  • Tormod Selbekk
    • 1
  • Ingerid Reinertsen
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Medical TechnologySINTEF Technology and SocietyTrondheimNorway
  2. 2.Department of Circulation and Medical ImagingNorwegian University of Science and TechnologyTrondheimNorway
  3. 3.The Central Norway Regional Health AuthorityTrondheimNorway
  4. 4.The Intervention CentreOslo University HospitalOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations