Assessment of a commercially available automatic deformable registration system

In recent years, a number of approaches have been applied to the problem of deformable registration validation. However, the challenge of assessing a commercial deformable registration system – in particular, an automatic registration system in which the deformable transformation is not readily accessible – has not been addressed. Using a collection of novel and established methods, we have developed a comprehensive, four‐component protocol for the validation of automatic deformable image registration systems over a range of IGRT applications. The protocol, which was applied to the Reveal‐MVS system, initially consists of a phantom study for determination of the system's general tendencies, while relative comparison of different registration settings is achieved through postregistration similarity measure evaluation. Synthetic transformations and contour‐based metrics are used for absolute verification of the system's intra‐modality and inter‐modality capabilities, respectively. Results suggest that the commercial system is more apt to account for global deformations than local variations when performing deformable image registration. Although the protocol was used to assess the capabilities of the Reveal‐MVS system, it can readily be applied to other commercial systems. The protocol is by no means static or definitive, and can be further expanded to investigate other potential deformable registration applications. PACS numbers: 87.19.xj, 87.56.Da, 87.57.nj

[1]  Joe Y. Chang,et al.  Validation of an accelerated ‘demons’ algorithm for deformable image registration in radiation therapy , 2005, Physics in medicine and biology.

[2]  G J Kutcher,et al.  The impact of (18)F-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) lymph node staging on the radiation treatment volumes in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. , 2000, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[3]  Hualiang Zhong,et al.  FEM-based evaluation of deformable image registration for radiation therapy , 2007, Physics in medicine and biology.

[4]  Piotr J Slomka,et al.  Software Approach to Merging Molecular with Anatomic Information , 2004 .

[5]  Karl Rohr,et al.  An adaptive irregular grid approach for 3D deformable image registration , 2006, Physics in medicine and biology.

[6]  Gregory C Sharp,et al.  Evaluation of deformable registration of patient lung 4DCT with subanatomical region segmentations. , 2008, Medical physics.

[7]  Paul Suetens,et al.  A Viscous Fluid Model for Multimodal Non-rigid Image Registration Using Mutual Information , 2002, MICCAI.

[8]  David J. Hawkes,et al.  Validation of nonrigid image registration using finite-element methods: application to breast MR images , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[9]  B F Hutton,et al.  Non-rigid image registration using a median-filtered coarse-to-fine displacement field and a symmetric correlation ratio , 2001, Physics in medicine and biology.

[10]  Daniel Rueckert,et al.  Nonrigid registration using free-form deformations: application to breast MR images , 1999, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[11]  Ken Goldberg,et al.  Registration of MR prostate images with biomechanical modeling and nonlinear parameter estimation. , 2006, Medical physics.

[12]  Dinggang Shen,et al.  Simulating deformations of MR brain images for validation of atlas-based segmentation and registration algorithms , 2006, NeuroImage.

[13]  Sung Yong Shin,et al.  Image Metamorphosis with Scattered Feature Constraints , 1996, IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph..

[14]  V Kalff,et al.  F‐18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography staging in radical radiotherapy candidates with nonsmall cell lung carcinoma , 2001, Cancer.

[15]  Benoît Macq,et al.  Comparison of 12 deformable registration strategies in adaptive radiation therapy for the treatment of head and neck tumors. , 2008, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[16]  Gerald J. Kutcher,et al.  The impact of 18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) lymph node staging on the radiation treatment volumes in patients with non-small cell lung cancer , 2000 .

[17]  D A Jaffray,et al.  Accuracy of finite element model-based multi-organ deformable image registration. , 2005, Medical physics.

[18]  Radhe Mohan,et al.  A deformable image registration method to handle distended rectums in prostate cancer radiotherapy. , 2006, Medical physics.

[19]  George T. Y. Chen,et al.  Deformable registration of 4D computed tomography data. , 2006, Medical physics.

[20]  M van Herk,et al.  Definition of the prostate in CT and MRI: a multi-observer study. , 1999, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[21]  Jan Seuntjens,et al.  A deformable phantom for 4D radiotherapy verification: design and image registration evaluation. , 2008, Medical physics.

[22]  Sarang Joshi,et al.  Large deformation three-dimensional image registration in image-guided radiation therapy , 2005, Physics in medicine and biology.

[23]  B. Daniel,et al.  Mapping of the prostate in endorectal coil-based MRI/MRSI and CT: a deformable registration and validation study. , 2004, Medical physics.

[24]  Boyd McCurdy,et al.  A feasibility study to investigate the use of thin-plate splines to account for prostate deformation. , 2005, Physics in medicine and biology.

[25]  Rojano Kashani,et al.  Technical note: a physical phantom for assessment of accuracy of deformable alignment algorithms. , 2007, Medical physics.

[26]  K. Langen,et al.  Organ motion and its management. , 2001, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[27]  G H Olivera,et al.  The use of megavoltage CT (MVCT) images for dose recomputations , 2005, Physics in medicine and biology.

[28]  J. Mazziotta,et al.  Automated image registration , 1993 .

[29]  A. D'Amico,et al.  Evaluation of three-dimensional finite element-based deformable registration of pre- and intraoperative prostate imaging. , 2001, Medical physics.

[30]  Edward L. Chaney,et al.  Automated Finite-Element Analysis for Deformable Registration of Prostate Images , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[31]  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.

[32]  Fred L. Bookstein,et al.  Principal Warps: Thin-Plate Splines and the Decomposition of Deformations , 1989, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[33]  David W Townsend,et al.  Image‐Guided Cancer Therapy Using PET/CT , 2004, Cancer journal.

[34]  Weiguo Lu,et al.  Deformable registration of the planning image (kVCT) and the daily images (MVCT) for adaptive radiation therapy , 2006, Physics in medicine and biology.

[35]  Cedric X. Yu,et al.  Deformable image registration for the use of magnetic resonance spectroscopy in prostate treatment planning. , 2004, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[36]  T. Byrne,et al.  A review of prostate motion with considerations for the treatment of prostate cancer. , 2005, Medical dosimetry : official journal of the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists.

[37]  Scott T. Grafton,et al.  Automated image registration: I. General methods and intrasubject, intramodality validation. , 1998, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[38]  C Thieke,et al.  An enhanced block matching algorithm for fast elastic registration in adaptive radiotherapy , 2006, Physics in medicine and biology.

[39]  T. Mackie,et al.  Fast free-form deformable registration via calculus of variations , 2004, Physics in medicine and biology.

[40]  Patrick A Kupelian,et al.  Initial experience with megavoltage (MV) CT guidance for daily prostate alignments. , 2005, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[41]  Michael Brady,et al.  Analysis of dynamic MR breast images using a model of contrast enhancement , 1997, Medical Image Anal..

[42]  Patrick Marais,et al.  Detecting the brain surface in sparse MRI using boundary models , 2000, Medical Image Anal..

[43]  Oscar Camara,et al.  Generalized Overlap Measures for Evaluation and Validation in Medical Image Analysis , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[44]  C. Ling,et al.  Evaluation of an automated deformable image matching method for quantifying lung motion in respiration-correlated CT images. , 2006, Medical physics.

[45]  G E Hanks,et al.  Initial clinical assessment of CT-MRI image fusion software in localization of the prostate for 3D conformal radiation therapy. , 1997, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[46]  Michael Unser,et al.  Unwarping of unidirectionally distorted EPI images , 2000, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[47]  Steven Haker,et al.  Deformable structure registration of bladder through surface mapping. , 2006, Medical physics.

[48]  L Dong,et al.  Quantification of accuracy of the automated nonlinear image matching and anatomical labeling (ANIMAL) nonlinear registration algorithm for 4D CT images of lung. , 2007, Medical physics.

[49]  Steve B. Jiang,et al.  4D-CT lung motion estimation with deformable registration: quantification of motion nonlinearity and hysteresis. , 2008, Medical physics.

[50]  G S Bauman,et al.  Tracking the dose distribution in radiation therapy by accounting for variable anatomy , 2004, Physics in medicine and biology.

[51]  M. Braun,et al.  Software for image registration: algorithms, accuracy, efficacy. , 2003, Seminars in nuclear medicine.

[52]  Geoffrey G. Zhang,et al.  Intrathoracic tumour motion estimation from CT imaging using the 3D optical flow method. , 2004, Physics in medicine and biology.