Literature DB >> 12692690

An imaging co-registration system using novel non-invasive and non-radioactive external markers.

Tung-Hsin Wu1, Jiunn-Kuen Wang, Jason J S Lee, Ren-Shyan Liu, Wan-Yuo Guo.   

Abstract

We present a system of image co-registration and its validation in phantom and volunteer studies. The system co-registered images via six novel non-invasive and non-radioactive external markers. The fiducial markers were attached with sponge bases on the skin surface of the phantom and the volunteers in a non-collinear and non-coplanar array. The subjects were scanned with a 1.5-T magnetic resonance (MR) imager using 2D spin-echo T1-weighted (SE) and 3D spoiled gradient recalled pulse sequences (SPGR) and with a positron emission tomography (PET) scanner for transmission imaging (TI) and emission imaging (EI). The sponge bases created radiolucent gaps with good contrast between the fiducial markers and skin surface. They made the markers visible with clear edge boundaries on both PET and MR images. The images to be registered were rescaled, interpolated, reformatted and followed by point-to-point registration for coordinate determination and the estimation of geometrical transformation and fiducial registration errors (FREs) via the fiducial markers. The images formed four matched pairs of inter-modality (SE-TI, SPGR-TI, SE-EI and SPGR-EI) and two pairs of intra-modality (SE-SPGR, TI-EI) imaging for direct co-registration. The parameters for direct co-registration of SE-TI and SPRG-TI were subsequently used as a bridge and applied for indirect co-registration of SE with EI (SE-EI(TI)) and SPGR with EI (SPGR-EI(TI)), respectively. The overall FREs of the phantom were, respectively, 1.50 mm for inter-modality and 1.10 mm for intra-modality direct co-registration. Those of volunteers were, respectively, 1.79 mm for inter-modality and 1.21 mm for intra-modality direct co-registration. For indirect co-registration, the overall FREs of the phantom were 2.53 mm (SE-EI(TI)) and 2.28 (SPGR-EI(TI)) mm; those of volunteers were 2.84 mm (SE-EI(TI)) and 2.81 mm (SPGR-EI(TI)). The errors of direct co-registration were smaller than those of indirect co-registration; the errors of phantom studies, MR-EI and SPGR-PET were smaller than those of the volunteer studies, MR-TI and SE-PET, respectively (all P<0.01, paired-difference test). In conclusion, motion artefacts, imaging blurring and spatial resolution of imaging remained the key factors affecting the accuracy of co-registration. High-accuracy indirect co-registration is provided by using non-invasive and non-radioactive external fiducial markers. The errors were less than 3 mm for both phantom and volunteer studies. The system is applicable for imaging co-registration of inter-modality non-dual imaging, inter-modality multi-tracer imaging and intra-modality multiple parameter images in clinical practice.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12692690     DOI: 10.1007/s00259-003-1173-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging        ISSN: 1619-7070            Impact factor:   9.236


  32 in total

1.  Automated registration of brain images using edge and surface features.

Authors:  L Y Hsu; M H Loew; J Ostuni
Journal:  IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag       Date:  1999 Nov-Dec

2.  A study of artefacts in simultaneous PET and MR imaging using a prototype MR compatible PET scanner.

Authors:  R B Slates; K Farahani; Y Shao; P K Marsden; J Taylor; P E Summers; S Williams; J Beech; S R Cherry
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Validation of fully automatic brain SPET to MR co-registration.

Authors:  L Barnden; R Kwiatek; Y Lau; B Hutton; L Thurfjell; K Pile; C Rowe
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med       Date:  2000-02

4.  Gamma camera-mounted anatomical X-ray tomography: technology, system characteristics and first images.

Authors:  M Bocher; A Balan; Y Krausz; Y Shrem; A Lonn; M Wilk; R Chisin
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med       Date:  2000-06

5.  A comparison of manual and automatic methods for registering scans of the head.

Authors:  T D Zuk; M S Atkins
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 10.048

Review 6.  Algorithms for radiological image registration and their clinical application.

Authors:  D J Hawkes
Journal:  J Anat       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 2.610

7.  Simultaneous PET and MR imaging.

Authors:  Y Shao; S R Cherry; K Farahani; K Meadors; S Siegel; R W Silverman; P K Marsden
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 3.609

8.  Combined PET/CT Imaging in Oncology. Impact on Patient Management.

Authors:  P G. Kluetz; C C. Meltzer; V L. Villemagne; P E. Kinahan; S Chander; M A. Martinelli; D W. Townsend
Journal:  Clin Positron Imaging       Date:  2000-11

9.  An automatic technique for finding and localizing externally attached markers in CT and MR volume images of the head.

Authors:  M Y Wang; C R Maurer; J M Fitzpatrick; R J Maciunas
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 4.538

10.  Image analysis in patients with cancer studied with a combined PET and CT scanner.

Authors:  M Charron; T Beyer; N N Bohnen; P E Kinahan; M Dachille; J Jerin; R Nutt; C C Meltzer; V Villemagne; D W Townsend
Journal:  Clin Nucl Med       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 7.794

View more
  1 in total

1.  System integration and DICOM image creation for PET-MR fusion.

Authors:  Chia-Hung Hsiao; Tsair Kao; Yu-Hua Fang; Jiunn-Kuen Wang; Wan-Yuo Guo; Liang-Hsiao Chao; Sang-Hue Yen
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 4.056

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.