Literature DB >> 31853975

Multimodality image registration in the head-and-neck using a deep learning-derived synthetic CT as a bridge.

Elizabeth M McKenzie1, Anand Santhanam1, Dan Ruan1, Daniel O'Connor1, Minsong Cao1, Ke Sheng1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To develop and demonstrate the efficacy of a novel head-and-neck multimodality image registration technique using deep-learning-based cross-modality synthesis. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty-five head-and-neck patients received magnetic resonance (MR) and computed tomography (CT) (CTaligned ) scans on the same day with the same immobilization. Fivefold cross validation was used with all of the MR-CT pairs to train a neural network to generate synthetic CTs from MR images. Twenty-four of 25 patients also had a separate CT without immobilization (CTnon-aligned ) and were used for testing. CTnon-aligned 's were deformed to the synthetic CT, and compared to CTnon-aligned registered to MR. The same registrations were performed from MR to CTnon-aligned and from synthetic CT to CTnon-aligned . All registrations used B-splines for modeling the deformation, and mutual information for the objective. Results were evaluated using the 95% Hausdorff distance among spinal cord contours, landmark error, inverse consistency, and Jacobian determinant of the estimated deformation fields.
RESULTS: When large initial rigid misalignment is present, registering CT to MRI-derived synthetic CT aligns the cord better than a direct registration. The average landmark error decreased from 9.8 ± 3.1 mm in MR→CTnon-aligned to 6.0 ± 2.1 mm in CTsynth →CTnon-aligned deformable registrations. In the CT to MR direction, the landmark error decreased from 10.0 ± 4.3 mm in CTnon-aligned →MR deformable registrations to 6.6 ± 2.0 mm in CTnon-aligned →CTsynth deformable registrations. The Jacobian determinant had an average value of 0.98. The proposed method also demonstrated improved inverse consistency over the direct method.
CONCLUSIONS: We showed that using a deep learning-derived synthetic CT in lieu of an MR for MR→CT and CT→MR deformable registration offers superior results to direct multimodal registration.
© 2019 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.

Entities:  

Keywords:  deep learning; multi-modal registration; synthetic CT

Year:  2020        PMID: 31853975      PMCID: PMC7067662          DOI: 10.1002/mp.13976

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  26 in total

1.  MIND: modality independent neighbourhood descriptor for multi-modal deformable registration.

Authors:  Mattias P Heinrich; Mark Jenkinson; Manav Bhushan; Tahreema Matin; Fergus V Gleeson; Sir Michael Brady; Julia A Schnabel
Journal:  Med Image Anal       Date:  2012-05-31       Impact factor: 8.545

2.  CT-based delineation of organs at risk in the head and neck region: DAHANCA, EORTC, GORTEC, HKNPCSG, NCIC CTG, NCRI, NRG Oncology and TROG consensus guidelines.

Authors:  Charlotte L Brouwer; Roel J H M Steenbakkers; Jean Bourhis; Wilfried Budach; Cai Grau; Vincent Grégoire; Marcel van Herk; Anne Lee; Philippe Maingon; Chris Nutting; Brian O'Sullivan; Sandro V Porceddu; David I Rosenthal; Nanna M Sijtsema; Johannes A Langendijk
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2015-08-13       Impact factor: 6.280

3.  Use and uncertainties of mutual information for computed tomography/ magnetic resonance (CT/MR) registration post permanent implant of the prostate.

Authors:  Peter L Roberson; P William McLaughlin; Vrinda Narayana; Sara Troyer; George V Hixson; Marc L Kessler
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Can positron emission tomography (PET) or PET/Computed Tomography (CT) acquired in a nontreatment position be accurately registered to a head-and-neck radiotherapy planning CT?

Authors:  Andrew B Hwang; Stephen L Bacharach; Sue S Yom; Vivian K Weinberg; Jeanne M Quivey; Benjamin L Franc; Ping Xia
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2008-12-10       Impact factor: 7.038

5.  elastix: a toolbox for intensity-based medical image registration.

Authors:  Stefan Klein; Marius Staring; Keelin Murphy; Max A Viergever; Josien P W Pluim
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2009-11-17       Impact factor: 10.048

6.  Unsupervised learning of probabilistic diffeomorphic registration for images and surfaces.

Authors:  Adrian V Dalca; Guha Balakrishnan; John Guttag; Mert R Sabuncu
Journal:  Med Image Anal       Date:  2019-07-12       Impact factor: 8.545

7.  Use of image registration and fusion algorithms and techniques in radiotherapy: Report of the AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group No. 132.

Authors:  Kristy K Brock; Sasa Mutic; Todd R McNutt; Hua Li; Marc L Kessler
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2017-05-23       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  Results of a multi-institutional benchmark test for cranial CT/MR image registration.

Authors:  Kenneth Ulin; Marcia M Urie; Joel M Cherlow
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2010-04-08       Impact factor: 7.038

9.  The use of deformable image registration to integrate diagnostic MRI into the radiotherapy planning pathway for head and neck cancer.

Authors:  Robert Chuter; Robin Prestwich; David Bird; Andrew Scarsbrook; Jonathan Sykes; Daniel Wilson; Richard Speight
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2016-08-03       Impact factor: 6.280

10.  Systematisation of spatial uncertainties for comparison between a MR and a CT-based radiotherapy workflow for prostate treatments.

Authors:  Tufve Nyholm; Morgan Nyberg; Magnus G Karlsson; Mikael Karlsson
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2009-11-17       Impact factor: 3.481

View more
  5 in total

Review 1.  Plant Genotype to Phenotype Prediction Using Machine Learning.

Authors:  Monica F Danilevicz; Mitchell Gill; Robyn Anderson; Jacqueline Batley; Mohammed Bennamoun; Philipp E Bayer; David Edwards
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2022-05-18       Impact factor: 4.772

Review 2.  A review on medical imaging synthesis using deep learning and its clinical applications.

Authors:  Tonghe Wang; Yang Lei; Yabo Fu; Jacob F Wynne; Walter J Curran; Tian Liu; Xiaofeng Yang
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2020-12-11       Impact factor: 2.102

3.  Abdominopelvic MR to CT registration using a synthetic CT intermediate.

Authors:  Jin Uk Heo; Feifei Zhou; Robert Jones; Jiamin Zheng; Xin Song; Pengjiang Qian; Atallah Baydoun; Melanie S Traughber; Jung-Wen Kuo; Rose Al Helo; Cheryl Thompson; Norbert Avril; Daniel DeVincent; Harold Hunt; Amit Gupta; Navid Faraji; Michael Z Kharouta; Arash Kardan; David Bitonte; Christian B Langmack; Aaron Nelson; Alexandria Kruzer; Min Yao; Jennifer Dorth; John Nakayama; Steven E Waggoner; Tithi Biswas; Eleanor Harris; Susan Sandstrom; Bryan J Traughber; Raymond F Muzic
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2022-08-03       Impact factor: 2.243

Review 4.  Machine learning applications in radiation oncology.

Authors:  Matthew Field; Nicholas Hardcastle; Michael Jameson; Noel Aherne; Lois Holloway
Journal:  Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol       Date:  2021-06-24

5.  Using neural networks to extend cropped medical images for deformable registration among images with differing scan extents.

Authors:  Elizabeth M McKenzie; Nuo Tong; Dan Ruan; Minsong Cao; Robert K Chin; Ke Sheng
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2021-07-11       Impact factor: 4.506

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.