Automated registration of sequential breath-hold dynamic contrast-enhanced MR images: a comparison of three techniques.

Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) is increasingly in use as an investigational biomarker of response in cancer clinical studies. Proper registration of images acquired at different time points is essential for deriving diagnostic information from quantitative pharmacokinetic analysis of these data. Motion artifacts in the presence of time-varying intensity due to contrast enhancement make this registration problem challenging. DCE-MRI of chest and abdominal lesions is typically performed during sequential breath-holds, which introduces misregistration due to inconsistent diaphragm positions and also places constraints on temporal resolution vis-à-vis free-breathing. In this work, we have employed a computer-generated DCE-MRI phantom to compare the performance of two published methods, Progressive Principal Component Registration and Pharmacokinetic Model-Driven Registration, with Sequential Elastic Registration (SER) to register adjacent time-sample images using a published general-purpose elastic registration algorithm. In all three methods, a 3D rigid-body registration scheme with a mutual information similarity measure was used as a preprocessing step. The DCE-MRI phantom images were mathematically deformed to simulate misregistration, which was corrected using the three schemes. All three schemes were comparably successful in registering large regions of interest (ROIs) such as muscle, liver, and spleen. SER was superior in retaining tumor volume and shape, and in registering smaller but important ROIs such as tumor core and tumor rim. The performance of SER on clinical DCE-MRI data sets is also presented.

[1]  David J. Fleet,et al.  Performance of optical flow techniques , 1994, International Journal of Computer Vision.

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

[3]  Angela Caunce,et al.  Tracer kinetic model–driven registration for dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI time‐series data , 2007, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[4]  Michael John Ackerman,et al.  The Visible Human Project. , 1991 .

[5]  David J. Heeger,et al.  Optical flow using spatiotemporal filters , 2004, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[6]  R. Edelman,et al.  Magnetic resonance imaging (2) , 1993, The New England journal of medicine.

[7]  Takeo Kanade,et al.  An Iterative Image Registration Technique with an Application to Stereo Vision , 1981, IJCAI.

[8]  Hany Farid,et al.  Elastic registration in the presence of intensity variations , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[9]  P. Tofts.  Modeling tracer kinetics in dynamic Gd‐DTPA MR imaging , 1997, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[10]  D. Hawkes,et al.  Anisotropic multi-scale fluid registration: evaluation in magnetic resonance breast imaging , 2005, Physics in medicine and biology.

[11]  Michael Brady,et al.  Simultaneous Segmentation and Registration of Contrast-Enhanced Breast MRI , 2005, IPMI.

[12]  Carlo Tomasi,et al.  Image Similarity Using Mutual Information of Regions , 2004, ECCV.

[13]  S. Kety.  The theory and applications of the exchange of inert gas at the lungs and tissues. , 1951, Pharmacological reviews.

[14]  Stuart Crozier,et al.  Dynamic breast MRI: Image registration and its impact on enhancement curve estimation , 2006, 2006 International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[15]  Luca T. Mainardi,et al.  A method for dynamic subtraction MR imaging of the liver , 2006, BMC Medical Imaging.

[16]  T W Redpath,et al.  The effects of renal variation upon measurements of perfusion and leakage volume in breast tumours. , 2004, Physics in medicine and biology.

[17]  Hemant D. Tagare,et al.  Symmetric and Transitive Registration of Image Sequences , 2008, Int. J. Biomed. Imaging.

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

[19]  D.S. Fussell,et al.  Registration of DCE MR Images for Computer-Aided Diagnosis of Breast Cancer , 2006, 2006 Fortieth Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems and Computers.

[20]  Benoit M. Dawant,et al.  Comparison and evaluation of retrospective intermodality image registration techniques , 1996, Medical Imaging.

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

[22]  D Atkinson,et al.  Registration of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI using a progressive principal component registration (PPCR) , 2007, Physics in medicine and biology.

[23]  Torsten Rohlfing,et al.  Volume-preserving nonrigid registration of MR breast images using free-form deformation with an incompressibility constraint , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[24]  Benoit M Dawant,et al.  A nonrigid registration algorithm for longitudinal breast MR images and the analysis of breast tumor response. , 2009, Magnetic resonance imaging.

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

[26]  Pierrick Coupé,et al.  3D Wavelet Subbands Mixing for Image Denoising , 2008, Int. J. Biomed. Imaging.

[27]  Kenya Murase,et al.  Efficient method for calculating kinetic parameters using T1‐weighted dynamic contrast‐enhanced magnetic resonance imaging , 2004, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[28]  Daniel Rueckert,et al.  Volume and Shape Preservation of Enhancing Lesions when Applying Non-rigid Registration to a Time Series of Contrast Enhancing MR Breast Images , 2000, MICCAI.