Grant Haskins1, Jochen Kruecker2, Uwe Kruger1, Sheng Xu3, Peter A Pinto3, Brad J Wood3, Pingkun Yan4. 1. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, 12180, USA. 2. Philips Research North America, Cambridge, MA, 02141, USA. 3. Center for Interventional Oncology, Radiology & Imaging Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA. 4. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, 12180, USA. yanp2@rpi.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The fusion of transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) and magnetic resonance (MR) images for guiding targeted prostate biopsy has significantly improved the biopsy yield of aggressive cancers. A key component of MR-TRUS fusion is image registration. However, it is very challenging to obtain a robust automatic MR-TRUS registration due to the large appearance difference between the two imaging modalities. The work presented in this paper aims to tackle this problem by addressing two challenges: (i) the definition of a suitable similarity metric and (ii) the determination of a suitable optimization strategy. METHODS: This work proposes the use of a deep convolutional neural network to learn a similarity metric for MR-TRUS registration. We also use a composite optimization strategy that explores the solution space in order to search for a suitable initialization for the second-order optimization of the learned metric. Further, a multi-pass approach is used in order to smooth the metric for optimization. RESULTS: The learned similarity metric outperforms the classical mutual information and also the state-of-the-art MIND feature-based methods. The results indicate that the overall registration framework has a large capture range. The proposed deep similarity metric-based approach obtained a mean TRE of 3.86 mm (with an initial TRE of 16 mm) for this challenging problem. CONCLUSION: A similarity metric that is learned using a deep neural network can be used to assess the quality of any given image registration and can be used in conjunction with the aforementioned optimization framework to perform automatic registration that is robust to poor initialization.
PURPOSE: The fusion of transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) and magnetic resonance (MR) images for guiding targeted prostate biopsy has significantly improved the biopsy yield of aggressive cancers. A key component of MR-TRUS fusion is image registration. However, it is very challenging to obtain a robust automatic MR-TRUS registration due to the large appearance difference between the two imaging modalities. The work presented in this paper aims to tackle this problem by addressing two challenges: (i) the definition of a suitable similarity metric and (ii) the determination of a suitable optimization strategy. METHODS: This work proposes the use of a deep convolutional neural network to learn a similarity metric for MR-TRUS registration. We also use a composite optimization strategy that explores the solution space in order to search for a suitable initialization for the second-order optimization of the learned metric. Further, a multi-pass approach is used in order to smooth the metric for optimization. RESULTS: The learned similarity metric outperforms the classical mutual information and also the state-of-the-art MIND feature-based methods. The results indicate that the overall registration framework has a large capture range. The proposed deep similarity metric-based approach obtained a mean TRE of 3.86 mm (with an initial TRE of 16 mm) for this challenging problem. CONCLUSION: A similarity metric that is learned using a deep neural network can be used to assess the quality of any given image registration and can be used in conjunction with the aforementioned optimization framework to perform automatic registration that is robust to poor initialization.
Authors: M Minhaj Siddiqui; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Baris Turkbey; Arvin K George; Jason Rothwax; Nabeel Shakir; Chinonyerem Okoro; Dima Raskolnikov; Howard L Parnes; W Marston Linehan; Maria J Merino; Richard M Simon; Peter L Choyke; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto Journal: JAMA Date: 2015-01-27 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Peter A Pinto; Paul H Chung; Ardeshir R Rastinehad; Angelo A Baccala; Jochen Kruecker; Compton J Benjamin; Sheng Xu; Pingkun Yan; Samuel Kadoury; Celene Chua; Julia K Locklin; Baris Turkbey; Joanna H Shih; Stacey P Gates; Carey Buckner; Gennady Bratslavsky; W Marston Linehan; Neil D Glossop; Peter L Choyke; Bradford J Wood Journal: J Urol Date: 2011-08-17 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: B Calio; A Sidana; D Sugano; S Gaur; A Jain; M Maruf; S Xu; P Yan; J Kruecker; M Merino; P Choyke; B Turkbey; B Wood; P Pinto Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2017-08-01 Impact factor: 5.554
Authors: Xuxin Chen; Ximin Wang; Ke Zhang; Kar-Ming Fung; Theresa C Thai; Kathleen Moore; Robert S Mannel; Hong Liu; Bin Zheng; Yuchen Qiu Journal: Med Image Anal Date: 2022-04-04 Impact factor: 13.828
Authors: Frank G Zöllner; Amira Šerifović-Trbalić; Gordian Kabelitz; Marek Kociński; Andrzej Materka; Peter Rogelj Journal: MAGMA Date: 2019-10-09 Impact factor: 2.310
Authors: Alireza Sedghi; Lauren J O'Donnell; Tina Kapur; Erik Learned-Miller; Parvin Mousavi; William M Wells Journal: Med Image Anal Date: 2020-12-18 Impact factor: 8.545