By Topic

A comparison of similarity measures for use in 2-D-3-D medical image registration

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$31 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

6 Author(s)
Penney, G.P. ; Div. of Radiol. Sci., Guys & St. Thomas Hosp., London, UK ; Weese, J. ; Little, J.A. ; Desmedt, P.
more authors

A comparison of six similarity measures for use in intensity-based two-dimensional-three-dimensional (2-D-3-D) image registration is presented. The accuracy of the similarity measures are compared to a "gold-standard" registration which has been accurately calculated using fiducial markers. The similarity measures are used to register a computed tomography (CT) scan of a spine phantom to a fluoroscopy image of the phantom. The registration is carried out within a region-of-interest in the fluoroscopy image which is user defined to contain a single vertebra. Many of the problems involved in this type of registration are caused by features which were not modeled by a phantom image alone. More realistic "gold-standard" data sets were simulated using the phantom image with clinical image features overlaid. Results show that the introduction of soft-tissue structures and interventional instruments into the phantom image can have a large effect on the performance of some similarity measures previously applied to 2-D-3-D image registration. Two measures were able to register accurately and robustly even when soft-tissue structures and interventional instruments were present as differences between the images. These measures were pattern intensity and gradient difference. Their registration accuracy, for all the rigid-body parameters except for the source to film translation, was within a root-mean-square (rms) error of 0.53 mm or degrees to the "gold-standard" values. No failures occurred while registering using these measures.

Published in:

Medical Imaging, IEEE Transactions on  (Volume:17 ,  Issue: 4 )