Accuracy of rigid CT-FDG-PET image registration of the liver.

Diagnostic and surgical strategies could benefit from accurate localization of liver malignancies via CT-FDG-PET image registration. However, registration uncertainty occurs due to protocol differences in data-acquisition, the limited spatial resolution of positron emission tomography (PET) and the low uptake of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) in normal liver tissue. To assess this uncertainty, methods were presented to estimate registration precision and systematic bias. A semi-automatic, organ-focused method was investigated to minimize the uncertainty well beyond the typical uncertainty of 5-10 mm obtained by commonly available methods. By restricting registration to the liver region and by isolating the liver on computed tomography (CT) from surrounding structures using a thresholding technique, registration was achieved using the mutual information-based method as implemented in insight toolkit (ITK). CT and FDG-PET images of 10 patients with liver metastases were registered rigidly a number of times. Results of the organ-focused method were compared to results of three commonly available methods (a manual, a landmark-based and a 'standard' mutual information-based method) where no dedicated image processing was performed. The proposed method outperformed the other methods with a precision (mean+/-s.d.) of 2.5+/-1.3 mm and a bias of 1.9 mm with a 95% CI of [1.0, 2.8] mm. Unlike the commonly available methods, our approach allows for robust CT-FDG-PET registration of the liver, with an accuracy better than the spatial resolution of the PET scanner that was used.

[1]  Max A. Viergever,et al.  A survey of medical image registration , 1998, Medical Image Anal..

[2]  Thomas Beyer,et al.  A combined PET/CT scanner: the path to true image fusion. , 2002, The British journal of radiology.

[3]  Thomas Beyer,et al.  Dual-modality PET/CT imaging: the effect of respiratory motion on combined image quality in clinical oncology , 2003, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

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

[5]  W. O'Dell,et al.  Modeling liver motion and deformation during the respiratory cycle using intensity-based nonrigid registration of gated MR images. , 2004, Medical physics.

[6]  A Collignon,et al.  Automated multimodality image registration using information theory , 1995 .

[7]  Jay B. West,et al.  The distribution of target registration error in rigid-body point-based registration , 2001, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[8]  Yuji Nakamoto,et al.  Clinically significant inaccurate localization of lesions with PET/CT: frequency in 300 patients. , 2003, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[9]  Damini Dey,et al.  Automated 3-dimensional registration of stand-alone (18)F-FDG whole-body PET with CT. , 2003, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[10]  Colin Studholme,et al.  Visual assessment of the accuracy of retrospective registration of MR and CT images of the brain , 1998, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[11]  Richard L Wahl,et al.  Applications of positron emission tomography/computed tomography image fusion in clinical positron emission tomography-clinical use, interpretation methods, diagnostic improvements. , 2003, Seminars in nuclear medicine.

[12]  Ronald Boellaard,et al.  Matching PET and CT scans of the head and neck area: development of method and validation. , 2002, Medical physics.

[13]  Cyrill Burger,et al.  Respiration-induced attenuation artifact at PET/CT: technical considerations. , 2003, Radiology.

[14]  Cyrill Burger,et al.  PET-CT image co-registration in the thorax: influence of respiration , 2002, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[15]  Yuji Nakamoto,et al.  PET-CT evaluation of 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose myocardial uptake: effect of respiratory motion. , 2003, Molecular imaging and biology : MIB : the official publication of the Academy of Molecular Imaging.

[16]  Paul A. Viola,et al.  Multi-modal volume registration by maximization of mutual information , 1996, Medical Image Anal..

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

[18]  E. Pedroni,et al.  The calibration of CT Hounsfield units for radiotherapy treatment planning. , 1996, Physics in medicine and biology.

[19]  R. Wahl,et al.  Comparison of mutual information-based warping accuracy for fusing body CT and PET by 2 methods: CT mapped onto PET emission scan versus CT mapped onto PET transmission scan. , 2002, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[20]  Paul A. Viola,et al.  Alignment by Maximization of Mutual Information , 1997, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[21]  John L. Humm,et al.  Radiotherapy treatment planning for patients with non-small cell lung cancer using positron emission tomography (PET). , 2002, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.