Validation of a novel geometric coordination registration using manual and semi-automatic registration in cone-beam computed tomogram

Cartesian coordinates define on a physical cubic corner (CC) with the corner tip as the origin and three corresponding line angles as (x, y, z)-axes. In its image (virtual) domains such as these obtained by cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and optical surface scanning, a single coordinate can then be registered based on the CC. The advantage of using a CC in registration is simple and accurate physical coordinate measurement. The accuracy of image-to-physical (IP) and imageto-image (II) transformations, measured by target registration error (TRE), can then be validated by comparing coordinates of target points in the virtual domains to that of the physical control. For the CBCT, the registration may be performed manually using a surgical planning software SimPlant Pro (manual registration (MR)) or semi-automatically using MeshLab and 3D Slicer (semiautomatic registration (SR)) matching the virtual display axes to the corresponding (x-y-z)-axes. This study aims to validate the use of CC as a surgical stereotactic marker by measuring TRE in MR and SR respectively. Mean TRE is 0.56 +/0.24 mm for MR and 0.39 +/0.21 mm for SR. The SR results in a more accurate registration than the MR and point-based registration with 20 fiducial points. TRE of the MR is less than 1.0 mm and still acceptable clinically.

[1]  J. Bartlett,et al.  Reliability, repeatability and reproducibility: analysis of measurement errors in continuous variables , 2008, Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

[2]  H M Pinsky,et al.  Accuracy of three-dimensional measurements using cone-beam CT. , 2006, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[3]  G. Greenstein,et al.  The mental foramen and nerve: clinical and anatomical factors related to dental implant placement: a literature review. , 2006, Journal of periodontology.

[4]  Tomas Lozano-Perez,et al.  An automatic registration method for frameless stereotaxy, image guided surgery, and enhanced reality visualization , 1996 .

[5]  Robert J. Maciunas,et al.  Registration of head volume images using implantable fiducial markers , 1997, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[6]  David C Hatcher,et al.  Operational principles for cone-beam computed tomography. , 2010, Journal of the American Dental Association.

[7]  Urs C Belser,et al.  Optimizing esthetics for implant restorations in the anterior maxilla: anatomic and surgical considerations. , 2004, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[8]  Manuel O Lagravère,et al.  Three-dimensional accuracy of measurements made with software on cone-beam computed tomography images. , 2008, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[9]  Ge Wang,et al.  Guest Editorial - Multirow Detector and Cone-Beam Spiral/Helical CT , 2000, IEEE Trans. Medical Imaging.

[10]  Walter Yu Hang Lam,et al.  Novel geometric coordination registration in cone-beam computed Tomogram , 2014, 2014 IEEE Applied Imagery Pattern Recognition Workshop (AIPR).

[11]  D. Hill,et al.  Medical image registration , 2001, Physics in medicine and biology.

[12]  Jay B. West,et al.  Predicting error in rigid-body point-based registration , 1998, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[13]  Luc M. Verhamme,et al.  A clinically relevant validation method for implant placement after virtual planning. , 2012, Clinical oral implants research.

[14]  J. Mühling,et al.  Computer assisted oral and maxillofacial surgery--a review and an assessment of technology. , 2001, International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery.

[15]  Guy Marchal,et al.  Multimodality image registration by maximization of mutual information , 1997, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.