Binary segmentation masks can improve intrasubject registration accuracy of bone structures in CT images

Annals of Biomedical Engineering

Volumn 38, Issue 7, 2010, Pages 2464-2472

  Museyko, Oleg ^a   Eisa, Fabian ^a   Hess, Andreas ^a   Schett, Georg ^a   Kalender, Willi A ^a   Engelke, Klaus ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ERLANGEN NUREMBERG   (Germany)

Author keywords

CT; Binary mask; Bone; LMR; Rigid registration

Indexed keywords

BINARY MASKS; BINARY SEGMENTATION; BONE STRUCTURE; CLINICAL APPLICATION; COMMON PROBLEMS; CT IMAGE; GRAY VALUE; INTENSITY-BASED; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MULTI-MODALITY; MULTI-MODALITY REGISTRATION; MULTI-RESOLUTIONS; MUTUAL INFORMATIONS; REGISTRATION ACCURACY; RIGID REGISTRATION; SUM OF ABSOLUTE DIFFERENCES; SUM OF SQUARED DIFFERENCES; SYMMETRIC DIFFERENCE; VOLUMES OF INTERESTS;

BONE; IMAGE SEGMENTATION; MAMMALS; RIGID STRUCTURES; THREE DIMENSIONAL;

COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY;

AGED; ARTICLE; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; FEMALE; HUMAN; MIDDLE AGED;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; FEMALE; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED;

EID: 77954660722     PISSN: 00906964     EISSN: 15739686     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10439-010-9981-x     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Batiste, D. L., et al. High-resolution MRI and micro-CT in an ex vivo rabbit anterior cruciate ligament transection model of osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr. Cartil. 12(8):614-626, 2004.
2. Blumenfeld, J., et al. Automatic prospective registration of high-resolution trabecular bone images of the tibia. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 35(11):1924-1931, 2007.
3. Boyd, S. K., et al. Evaluation of three-dimensional image registration methodologies for in vivo micro-computed tomography. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 34(10):1587-1599, 2006.
4. de Bruin, D. M., et al. In vivo three-dimensional imaging of neovascular age-related macular degeneration using optical frequency domain imaging at 1050 nm. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 49(10):4545-4552, 2008.
5. Dekker, N., L. S. Ploeger, and M. van Herk. Evaluation of cost functions for gray value matching of two-dimensional images in radiotherapy. Med. Phys. 30(5):778-784, 2003.
6. Droske, M., and M. Rumpf. Multiscale joint segmentation and registration of image morphology. IEEE Trans. Pattern. Anal. Mach. Intell. 29(12):2181-2194, 2007.
7. Engelke, K., et al. Reanalysis precision of 3D quantitative computed tomography (QCT) of the spine. Bone 44(4): 566-572, 2009.
8. Greenspan, M., L. I. Wang, and R. Ellis. Validation and improved registration of bone segmentation using contour coherency. Conf Proc. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc. 1:244-247, 2006. (Pubitemid 46519843)
9. Hajnal, J. V., D. L. Hill, and D. J. Hawkes (eds.). Medical image analysis. In: Biomedical Engineering, edited by M. Neuman. CRC Press Inc., 2001, 392 p.
10. Hardisty, M., et al. Quantitative characterization of metastatic disease in the spine. Part I. Semiautomated segmentation using atlas-based deformable registration and the level set method. Med. Phys. 34(8):3127-3134, 2007.
11. Ibanez, L., et al. The ITK Software Guide. Clifton Park, NY: Kitware Inc., 787 pp., 2005. http://www.itk.org/ItkSoftwareGuide.pdf.
12. Kang, Y., K. Engelke, and W. A. Kalender. A new accurate and precise 3-D segmentation method for skeletal structures in volumetric CT data. IEEE Trans. Med Imaging 22(5):586-598, 2003.
13. Li, W., et al. Automated registration of hip and spine for longitudinal QCT studies: integration with 3D densitometric and structural analysis. Bone 38(2):273-279, 2006.
14. Macneil, J. A. and S. K. Boyd. Improved reproducibility of high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography for measurement of bone quality. Med. Eng. Phys. 2007.
15. Mahfouz, M. R., et al. Effect of segmentation errors on 3D-to-2D registration of implant models in X-ray images. J. Biomech. 38(2):229-239, 2005.
16. Mastmeyer, A., et al. A hierarchical 3D segmentation method and the definition of vertebral body coordinate systems for QCT of the lumbar spine. Med. Image Anal. 10(4):560-577, 2006.
17. Nikou, C., F. Heitz, and J.-P. Armspach. Robust voxel similarity metrics for the registration of dissimilar single and multimodal images. Pattern Recogn. 32:18, 1999.
18. Penney, G. P., et al. A comparison of similarity measures for use in 2-D-3-D medical image registration. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 17(4):586-595, 1998.
19. Rajapakse, C. S., J. F. Magland, and F. W. Wehrli. Fast prospective registration of in vivo MR images of trabecular bone microstructure in longitudinal studies. Magn. Reson. Med. 59(5):1120-1126, 2008.
20. Stammberger, T., et al. Elastic registration of 3D cartilage surfaces from MR image data for detecting local changes incartilage thickness. Magn. Reson. Med. 44(4):592-601, 2000.
21. Waarsing, J. H., et al. Detecting and tracking local changes in the tibiae of individual rats: a novel method to analyse longitudinal in vivo micro-CT data. Bone 34(1):163-169, 2004.
22. Yezzi, A., L. Zollei, and T. Kapur. A variational framework for integrating segmentation and registration through active contours. Med. Image Anal. 7(2):171-185, 2003.