Evaluation of sub-voxel registration accuracy between MRI and 3D MR spectroscopy of the brain

The implementation of Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopic Imaging (MRSI) for diagnostic imaging benefits from close integration of the lower-spatial resolution MRSI information with information from high-resolution structural MRI. Since patients can commonly move between acquisitions, it is necessary to account for possible mis-registration between the datasets arising from differences in patient positioning. In this paper we evaluate the use of 4 common multi-modality registration criteria to recover alignment between high resolution structural MRI and 3D MRSI data of the brain with sub-voxel accuracy. We explore the use of alternative MRSI water reference images to provide different types of structural information for the alignment process. The alignment accuracy was evaluated using both synthetically created MRSI and MRI data and a set of carefully collected subject image data with known ground truth spatial transformation between image volumes. The final accuracy and precision of estimates were assessed using multiple random starts of the registration algorithm. Sub voxel accuracy was found by all four similarity criteria with normalized mutual information providing the lowest target registration error for the 7 subject images. This effort supports the ongoing development of a database of brain metabolite distributions in normal subjects, which will be used in the evaluation of metabolic changes in neurological diseases.

[1]  J. Hogg Magnetic resonance imaging. , 1994, Journal of the Royal Naval Medical Service.

[2]  N. Schuff,et al.  Magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging reconstruction with deformable shape‐intensity models , 2003, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[3]  Andreas Ebel,et al.  Improved spectral quality for 3D MR spectroscopic imaging using a high spatial resolution acquisition strategy. , 2003, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[4]  Colin Studholme,et al.  An overlap invariant entropy measure of 3D medical image alignment , 1999, Pattern Recognit..

[5]  A Ebel,et al.  Comparison of methods for reduction of lipid contamination for in vivo proton MR spectroscopic imaging of the brain , 2001, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[6]  Yu-Chung N. Cheng,et al.  Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Physical Principles and Sequence Design , 1999 .

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

[8]  Nicholas Ayache,et al.  The Correlation Ratio as a New Similarity Measure for Multimodal Image Registration , 1998, MICCAI.

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

[10]  Lisa M. Brown,et al.  A survey of image registration techniques , 1992, CSUR.

[11]  Gerald Q. Maguire,et al.  Comparison and evaluation of retrospective intermodality brain image registration techniques. , 1997, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[12]  William H. Press,et al.  Numerical Recipes in Fortran 77: The Art of Scientific Computing 2nd Editionn - Volume 1 of Fortran Numerical Recipes , 1992 .

[13]  D. Louis Collins,et al.  Design and construction of a realistic digital brain phantom , 1998, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

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

[15]  Max A. Viergever,et al.  Mutual-information-based registration of medical images: a survey , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[16]  Andreas Ebel,et al.  Detection and correction of frequency instabilities for volumetric 1H echo‐planar spectroscopic imaging , 2005, Magnetic resonance in medicine.