Quantitative Comparison of Automatic and Interactive Methods for MRI–SPECT Image Registration of the Brain Based on 3-Dimensional Calculation of Error

Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Klaus Hahn¹  Thomas Pfluger¹  Frank Berger¹  Gerda Leinsinger¹  Patrick Suntheim¹  Christian Vollmar¹  Stefan Dresel¹  Axel Wismüller¹ 

[1] Departments of Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Klinikum Innenstadt, University of Munich, Munich, Germany Departments of Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Klinikum Innenstadt, University of Munich, Munich, Germany Departments of Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Klinikum Innenstadt, University of Munich, Munich, Germany

关键词: image fusion;    image registration;    MRI;    SPECT;    brain;   

DOI  :  

学科分类：医学（综合）

来源: Society of Nuclear Medicine

【 摘 要 】

A wide range of techniques for registration of medical images has been devised in recent years. The aim of this study is to quantify the overall spatial registration error of 3 different methods for image registration: interactive matching, surface matching, and uniformity index matching as described by Woods. Methods: MRI and ethylcysteinate dimer-SPECT images of the brain were registered for 15 patients. The matching error was assessed by determining intra- and interobserver variability of registrations. Quantification of the registration error was based on the mean spatial distance of 5000 voxels between 2 image positions. The mean position after repeated registrations in each patient was used as the gold standard. To evaluate the coherence of the 3 different registration methods, intermethod variability was determined. Results: Interactive matching showed an intraobserver/interobserver variability of 1.5 ± 0.3 mm/1.6 ± 0.3 mm (mean ± SD). The time demand for this method was 11 ± 5 min. Surface matching revealed a variability of 2.6 ± 1.1 mm/3.8 ± 1.0 mm and a time demand of 26 ± 12 min. Reproducibility of Woods' algorithm was 2.2 ± 0.8 mm with a time demand of 9 ± 3 min. In 4 of the 15 cases, Woods' method failed. The mean deviation between all 3 methods was 2.3 ± 0.8 mm. Conclusion: With a suitable user interface, interactive matching had the lowest registration error. The influence of subjectivity was shown to be negligible. Therefore, interactive matching is our preferred technique for image fusion of the brain.

【 授权许可】

Unknown