Optimization of real-time rigid registration motion compensation for prostate biopsies using 2D/3D ultrasound

During image-guided prostate biopsy, needles are targeted at suspicious tissues to obtain specimens that are later examined histologically for cancer. Patient motion causes inaccuracies when using MR-transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) image fusion approaches used to augment the conventional biopsy procedure. Motion compensation using a single, user initiated correction can be performed to temporarily compensate for prostate motion, but a real-time continuous registration offers an improvement to clinical workflow by reducing user interaction and procedure time. An automatic motion compensation method, approaching the frame rate of a TRUS-guided system, has been developed for use during fusion-based prostate biopsy to improve image guidance. 2D and 3D TRUS images of a prostate phantom were registered using an intensity based algorithm utilizing normalized cross-correlation and Powell’s method for optimization with user initiated and continuous registration techniques. The user initiated correction performed with observed computation times of 78 ± 35 ms, 74 ± 28 ms, and 113 ± 49 ms for in-plane, out-of-plane, and roll motions, respectively, corresponding to errors of 0.5 ± 0.5 mm, 1.5 ± 1.4 mm, and 1.5 ± 1.6°. The continuous correction performed significantly faster (p < 0.05) than the user initiated method, with observed computation times of 31 ± 4 ms, 32 ± 4 ms, and 31 ± 6 ms for in-plane, out-of-plane, and roll motions, respectively, corresponding to errors of 0.2 ± 0.2 mm, 0.6 ± 0.5 mm, and 0.8 ± 0.4°.

[1]  William H. Press,et al.  Numerical Recipes 3rd Edition: The Art of Scientific Computing , 2007 .

[2]  Aaron Fenster,et al.  Quantification of prostate deformation due to needle insertion during TRUS-guided biopsy: comparison of hand-held and mechanically stabilized systems. , 2011, Medical physics.

[3]  Miguel Srougi,et al.  Upgrading the Gleason score in extended prostate biopsy: implications for treatment choice. , 2009, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[4]  W. Fair,et al.  Incidence and clinical significance of false-negative sextant prostate biopsies. , 1998, The Journal of urology.

[5]  A. Fenster,et al.  2D-3D rigid registration to compensate for prostate motion during 3D TRUS-guided biopsy. , 2013, Medical physics.

[6]  Sheng Xu,et al.  Realtime TRUS/MRI Fusion Targeted-Biopsy for Prostate Cancer: A Clinical Demonstration of Increased Positive Biopsy Rates , 2010, Prostate Cancer Imaging.

[7]  Michael J Ackerman,et al.  Engineering and algorithm design for an image processing Api: a technical report on ITK--the Insight Toolkit. , 2002, Studies in health technology and informatics.

[8]  B. Stewart,et al.  World cancer report 2014. , 2014 .

[9]  A. Fenster,et al.  Assessment of image registration accuracy in three-dimensional transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. , 2010, Medical physics.

[10]  P. Choyke,et al.  Real-time MRI-TRUS fusion for guidance of targeted prostate biopsies , 2008, Computer aided surgery : official journal of the International Society for Computer Aided Surgery.

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

[12]  Aaron Fenster,et al.  Design and evaluation of a 3D transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsy system. , 2008, Medical physics.

[13]  Dean C. Barratt,et al.  Multiattribute probabilistic prostate elastic registration (MAPPER): application to fusion of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging. , 2015, Medical physics.

[14]  Bostjan Likar,et al.  A review of 3D/2D registration methods for image-guided interventions , 2012, Medical Image Anal..

[15]  Donal B. Downey,et al.  Three-dimensional ultrasound imaging , 1995, Medical Imaging.

[16]  Aaron Fenster,et al.  Mechanically assisted 3D ultrasound guided prostate biopsy system. , 2008, Medical physics.

[17]  Thomas Hambrock,et al.  Simulated required accuracy of image registration tools for targeting high-grade cancer components with prostate biopsies , 2013, European Radiology.

[18]  Georgios Sakas,et al.  A novel stereotactic prostate biopsy system integrating pre-interventional magnetic resonance imaging and live ultrasound fusion. , 2011, The Journal of urology.

[19]  Monish Aron,et al.  3-Dimensional elastic registration system of prostate biopsy location by real-time 3-dimensional transrectal ultrasound guidance with magnetic resonance/transrectal ultrasound image fusion. , 2012, The Journal of urology.

[20]  D. A. Christopher,et al.  A wall-less vessel phantom for Doppler ultrasound studies. , 1995, Ultrasound in medicine & biology.

[21]  Zeike A. Taylor,et al.  MR to ultrasound registration for image-guided prostate interventions , 2012, Medical Image Anal..

[22]  Ying Sun,et al.  A Review of Recent Advances in Registration Techniques Applied to Minimally Invasive Therapy , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Multimedia.

[23]  A Fenster,et al.  Evaluation of intersession 3D-TRUS to 3D-TRUS image registration for repeat prostate biopsies. , 2011, Medical physics.