scholarly journals Post-implant computed tomography-magnetic resonance prostate image registration using feature line parallelization and normalized mutual information

2007 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandra Vidakovic ◽  
Hans S. Jans ◽  
Abe Alexander ◽  
Ron S. Sloboda
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Image Registration ◽  
Mutual Information ◽  
Normalized Mutual Information ◽  
Feature Line

scholarly journals Use and uncertainties of mutual information for computed tomography/magnetic resonance (CT/MR) registration post permanent implant of the prostate

2005 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 473-482 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter L. Roberson ◽  
P. William McLaughlin ◽  
Vrinda Narayana ◽  
Sara Troyer ◽  
George V. Hixson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Mutual Information ◽  
Permanent Implant

Registration Method Between Phase-Contrast Magnetic Resonance Angiography and Time-of-Flight Magnetic Resonance Angiography—A Preliminary Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-39
Author(s):  
Seiji Nomura ◽  
Taichi Kin ◽  
Akira Kunimatsu ◽  
Masaaki Shojima ◽  
Yasushi Watanebe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Magnetic Resonance Angiography ◽  
Mutual Information ◽  
Phase Contrast ◽  
Time Of Flight ◽  
Normalized Mutual Information ◽  
Phase Contrast Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Contrast Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Data Group ◽  
Method Group

Purpose: To evaluate a new method that registers phase-contrast magnetic resonance angiography images to time-of-flight magnetic resonance angiography images. Methods: Magnetic resonance angiography datasets of 10 healthy volunteers obtained by using two modalities (phase-contrast magnetic resonance angiography and time-of-flight magnetic resonance angiography) were preprocessed. Specifically, vessel regions were extracted using the region growing method with a threshold of 10% of the signal intensity maximum or 50% of the signal intensity maximum for phase-contrast magnetic resonance angiography images and time-of-flight magnetic resonance angiography images, respectively. Then, the normalized mutual information method was used to determine spatial positions, and registration between non-preprocessed phase-contrast magnetic resonance angiography and time-of-flight magnetic resonance angiography was performed using the spatial position information. Misalignment of 3 anatomical points was used to compare the accuracy of registration in this data group (the proposed method group) to that in the data group without registration (the non-registration group) and that in the data group subjected to normalized mutual information-based registration without preprocessing (the non-preprocessing group). Results: The mean misalignment of 3 anatomical points ± standard error was 1.69 ± 0.11 mm in the proposed method group, and 2.77± 0.13 mm and 90.28 ± 8.24 mm in the non-registration group and non-preprocessing group, respectively. The mean misalignment of 3 anatomical points was significantly smaller in the proposed method group than in the non-registration group (p = 0 001). Conclusions: The proposed preprocessing and registration method improved the accuracy of normalized mutual information-based registration between phase-contrast magnetic resonance angiography images and time-of-flight magnetic resonance angiography images.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document