SU‐FF‐I‐99: Multi‐Level Regularization Approaches of Non‐Parametric Deformable Registrations

Hsiang-Chi Kuo, D. Mah, A. Wu, K. Chuang, L. Hong, Ravindra Yaparpalvi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose: Most deformation algorithms using a single value smoother during optimization. We investigate multi‐level regularizations (smoothers) during the multi‐resolution iteration of two non‐parametric deformable registrations (symmetry demon (SD) and diffeomorphic (DM) algorithms) and compare to a conventional single value smoother. Method and materials: Smoothers were applied at 5 different levels of multi‐resolution image registration process. Results were compared in terms of convergence rate, similarity measures (mean square error MSE and normal correlation NC), and Jacobian determinant of the vector displacement field (VDF), which measures how a voxel volume changes after registration. Six patients (mean 400×300×70 pixels) with large internal organ movement (five from 4DCT, one patient who was scanned with full and empty bladder) were evaluated in this study. The liver and lung displacement and bowel movements were approximately 1.5cm. The bladder volume changed by > 250cm3. Results: As smoothers increase their convergence rate decreases, however, smaller smoothers also have large negative value of the Jacobian determinant suggesting that the one‐to‐one mapping has been lost; i.e. image morphology is not preserved. In the SD method, the multi‐level smoother calculates faster than the large single value smoother and is equivalent to the smallest single value smoother. For the DM algorithm, since our multi‐level smoothers were implemented at the smoothing matrix (S) and the update field (U), calculation times are longer. The similarity measured by MSE, NC, and visual comparisons show that the multi‐level implementation has better results than large single value smoothers, and better or equivalent for smallest single value smoother. Conclusion: Multi‐level regularization combined with multi‐resolution has the advantage of preserving the morphology of the images and the registration results.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2457
Number of pages1
JournalMedical Physics
Volume36
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - 2009

Fingerprint

Urinary Bladder
Lung
Liver

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biophysics
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

SU‐FF‐I‐99 : Multi‐Level Regularization Approaches of Non‐Parametric Deformable Registrations. / Kuo, Hsiang-Chi; Mah, D.; Wu, A.; Chuang, K.; Hong, L.; Yaparpalvi, Ravindra.

In: Medical Physics, Vol. 36, No. 6, 2009, p. 2457.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{e50098c8173d4e54a16681787b52440a,
title = "SU‐FF‐I‐99: Multi‐Level Regularization Approaches of Non‐Parametric Deformable Registrations",
abstract = "Purpose: Most deformation algorithms using a single value smoother during optimization. We investigate multi‐level regularizations (smoothers) during the multi‐resolution iteration of two non‐parametric deformable registrations (symmetry demon (SD) and diffeomorphic (DM) algorithms) and compare to a conventional single value smoother. Method and materials: Smoothers were applied at 5 different levels of multi‐resolution image registration process. Results were compared in terms of convergence rate, similarity measures (mean square error MSE and normal correlation NC), and Jacobian determinant of the vector displacement field (VDF), which measures how a voxel volume changes after registration. Six patients (mean 400×300×70 pixels) with large internal organ movement (five from 4DCT, one patient who was scanned with full and empty bladder) were evaluated in this study. The liver and lung displacement and bowel movements were approximately 1.5cm. The bladder volume changed by > 250cm3. Results: As smoothers increase their convergence rate decreases, however, smaller smoothers also have large negative value of the Jacobian determinant suggesting that the one‐to‐one mapping has been lost; i.e. image morphology is not preserved. In the SD method, the multi‐level smoother calculates faster than the large single value smoother and is equivalent to the smallest single value smoother. For the DM algorithm, since our multi‐level smoothers were implemented at the smoothing matrix (S) and the update field (U), calculation times are longer. The similarity measured by MSE, NC, and visual comparisons show that the multi‐level implementation has better results than large single value smoothers, and better or equivalent for smallest single value smoother. Conclusion: Multi‐level regularization combined with multi‐resolution has the advantage of preserving the morphology of the images and the registration results.",
author = "Hsiang-Chi Kuo and D. Mah and A. Wu and K. Chuang and L. Hong and Ravindra Yaparpalvi",
year = "2009",
doi = "10.1118/1.3181219",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "36",
pages = "2457",
journal = "Medical Physics",
issn = "0094-2405",
publisher = "AAPM - American Association of Physicists in Medicine",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - SU‐FF‐I‐99

T2 - Multi‐Level Regularization Approaches of Non‐Parametric Deformable Registrations

AU - Kuo, Hsiang-Chi

AU - Mah, D.

AU - Wu, A.

AU - Chuang, K.

AU - Hong, L.

AU - Yaparpalvi, Ravindra

PY - 2009

Y1 - 2009

N2 - Purpose: Most deformation algorithms using a single value smoother during optimization. We investigate multi‐level regularizations (smoothers) during the multi‐resolution iteration of two non‐parametric deformable registrations (symmetry demon (SD) and diffeomorphic (DM) algorithms) and compare to a conventional single value smoother. Method and materials: Smoothers were applied at 5 different levels of multi‐resolution image registration process. Results were compared in terms of convergence rate, similarity measures (mean square error MSE and normal correlation NC), and Jacobian determinant of the vector displacement field (VDF), which measures how a voxel volume changes after registration. Six patients (mean 400×300×70 pixels) with large internal organ movement (five from 4DCT, one patient who was scanned with full and empty bladder) were evaluated in this study. The liver and lung displacement and bowel movements were approximately 1.5cm. The bladder volume changed by > 250cm3. Results: As smoothers increase their convergence rate decreases, however, smaller smoothers also have large negative value of the Jacobian determinant suggesting that the one‐to‐one mapping has been lost; i.e. image morphology is not preserved. In the SD method, the multi‐level smoother calculates faster than the large single value smoother and is equivalent to the smallest single value smoother. For the DM algorithm, since our multi‐level smoothers were implemented at the smoothing matrix (S) and the update field (U), calculation times are longer. The similarity measured by MSE, NC, and visual comparisons show that the multi‐level implementation has better results than large single value smoothers, and better or equivalent for smallest single value smoother. Conclusion: Multi‐level regularization combined with multi‐resolution has the advantage of preserving the morphology of the images and the registration results.

AB - Purpose: Most deformation algorithms using a single value smoother during optimization. We investigate multi‐level regularizations (smoothers) during the multi‐resolution iteration of two non‐parametric deformable registrations (symmetry demon (SD) and diffeomorphic (DM) algorithms) and compare to a conventional single value smoother. Method and materials: Smoothers were applied at 5 different levels of multi‐resolution image registration process. Results were compared in terms of convergence rate, similarity measures (mean square error MSE and normal correlation NC), and Jacobian determinant of the vector displacement field (VDF), which measures how a voxel volume changes after registration. Six patients (mean 400×300×70 pixels) with large internal organ movement (five from 4DCT, one patient who was scanned with full and empty bladder) were evaluated in this study. The liver and lung displacement and bowel movements were approximately 1.5cm. The bladder volume changed by > 250cm3. Results: As smoothers increase their convergence rate decreases, however, smaller smoothers also have large negative value of the Jacobian determinant suggesting that the one‐to‐one mapping has been lost; i.e. image morphology is not preserved. In the SD method, the multi‐level smoother calculates faster than the large single value smoother and is equivalent to the smallest single value smoother. For the DM algorithm, since our multi‐level smoothers were implemented at the smoothing matrix (S) and the update field (U), calculation times are longer. The similarity measured by MSE, NC, and visual comparisons show that the multi‐level implementation has better results than large single value smoothers, and better or equivalent for smallest single value smoother. Conclusion: Multi‐level regularization combined with multi‐resolution has the advantage of preserving the morphology of the images and the registration results.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85024824955&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85024824955&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1118/1.3181219

DO - 10.1118/1.3181219

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85024824955

VL - 36

SP - 2457

JO - Medical Physics

JF - Medical Physics

SN - 0094-2405

IS - 6

ER -