The quality of adaptive treatment planning depends on the accuracy of its underlying deformable image registration (DIR). The purpose of this study is to evaluate the performance of two DIR algorithms, B-spline–based deformable multipass (DMP) and deformable demons (Demons), implemented in a commercial software package. Evaluations were conducted using both computational and physical deformable phantoms. Based on a finite element method (FEM), a total of 11 computational models were developed from a set of CT images acquired from four lung and one prostate cancer patients. FEM generated displacement vector fields (DVF) were used to construct the lung and prostate image phantoms. Based on a fast-Fourier transform technique, image noise power spectrum was incorporated into the prostate image phantoms to create simulated CBCT images. The FEM-DVF served as a gold standard for verification of the two registration algorithms performed on these phantoms. The registration algorithms were also evaluated at the homologous points quantified in the CT images of a physical lung phantom. The results indicated that the mean errors of the DMP algorithm were in the range of 1.0 ~ 3.1 mm for the computational phantoms and 1.9 mm for the physical lung phantom. For the computational prostate phantoms, the corresponding mean error was 1.0–1.9 mm in the prostate, 1.9–2.4 mm in the rectum, and 1.8–2.1 mm over the entire patient body. Sinusoidal errors induced by B-spline interpolations were observed in all the displacement profiles of the DMP registrations. Regions of large displacements were observed to have more registration errors. Patient-specific FEM models have been developed to evaluate the DIR algorithms implemented in the commercial software package. It has been found that the accuracy of these algorithms is patient-dependent and related to various factors including tissue deformation magnitudes and image intensity gradients across the regions of interest. This may suggest that DIR algorithms need to be verified for each registration instance when implementing adaptive radiation therapy.
Purpose Deformable image registration (DIR) algorithms have inherent uncertainties in their displacement vector fields (DVFs). The purpose of this study is to develop an optimal metric to estimate DIR uncertainties. Methods Six computational phantoms have been developed from the CT images of lung cancer patients using a finite element method (FEM). The FEM generated DVFs were used as a standard for registrations performed on each of these phantoms. A mechanics-based metric, unbalanced energy (UE), was developed to evaluate these registration DVFs. The potential correlation between UE and DIR errors was explored using multivariate analysis, and the results were validated by landmark approach and compared with two other error metrics: DVF inverse consistency (IC) and image intensity difference (ID). Landmark-based validation was performed using the POPI-model. Results The results show that the Pearson correlation coefficient between UE and DIR error is rUE-Error = 0.50. This is higher than rIC-Error = 0.29 for IC and DIR error and rID-Error = 0.37 for ID and DIR error. The Pearson correlation coefficient between UE and the product of the DIR displacements and errors is rUE-Error×DVF = 0.62 for the six patients and rUE-Error×DVF = 0.73 for the POPI-model data. Conclusion It has been demonstrated that unbalanced energy has a strong correlation with DIR errors, and the UE metric outperforms the IC and ID metrics in estimating DIR uncertainties. The quantified UE metric can be a useful tool for adaptive treatment strategies, including probability-based adaptive treatment planning.
Background This study evaluated breast tissue stiffness measured by ultrasound elastography and the percent breast density measured by magnetic resonance imaging to understand their relationship. Methods Magnetic resonance imaging and whole breast ultrasound were performed in 20 patients with suspicious lesions. Only the contralateral normal breasts were analyzed. Breast tissue stiffness was measured from the echogenic homogeneous fibroglandular tissues in the central breast area underneath the nipple. An automatic, computer algorithm-based, segmentation method was used to segment the whole breast and fibroglandular tissues on three dimensional magnetic resonanceimaging. A finite element model was applied to deform the prone magnetic resonance imaging to match the supine ultrasound images, by using the inversed gravity loaded transformation. After deformation, the tissue level used in ultrasound elastography measurement could be estimated on the deformed supine magnetic resonance imaging to measure the breast density in the corresponding tissue region. Results The mean breast tissue stiffness was 2.3 ± 0.8 m/s. The stiffness was not correlated with age (r = 0.29). Overall, there was no positive correlation between breast stiffness and breast volume (r = − 0.14), or the whole breast percent density (r = − 0.09). There was also no correlation between breast stiffness and the local percent density measured from the corresponding region (r = − 0.12). Conclusions The lack of correlation between breast stiffness measured by ultrasound and the whole breast or local percent density measured by magnetic resonance imaging suggests that breast stiffness is not solely related to the amount of fibroglandular tissue. Further studies are needed to investigate whether they are dependent or independent cancer risk factors.
BackgroundTo investigate the relationship between mammographic density measured in four quadrants of a breast with the location of the occurred cancer.MethodsOne hundred and ten women diagnosed with unilateral breast cancer that could be determined in one specific breast quadrant were retrospectively studied. Women with previous cancer/breast surgery were excluded. The craniocaudal (CC) and mediolateral oblique (MLO) mammography of the contralateral normal breast were used to separate a breast into 4 quadrants: Upper-Outer (UO), Upper-Inner (UI), Lower-Outer (LO), and Lower-Inner (LI). The breast area (BA), dense area (DA), and percent density (PD) in each quadrant were measured by using the fuzzy-C-means segmentation. The BA, DA, and PD were compared between patients who had cancer occurring in different quadrants.ResultsThe upper-outer quadrant had the highest BA (37 ± 15 cm2) and DA (7.1 ± 2.9 cm2), with PD = 20.0 ± 5.8%. The order of BA and DA in the 4 separated quadrants were: UO > UI > LO > LI, and almost all pair-wise comparisons showed significant differences. For tumor location, 67 women (60.9%) had tumor in UO, 16 (14.5%) in UI, 7 (6.4%) in LO, and 20 (18.2%) in LI quadrant, respectively. The estimated odds and the 95% confidence limits of tumor development in the UO, UI, LO and LI quadrants were 1.56 (1.06, 2.29), 0.17 (0.10, 0.29), 0.07 (0.03, 0.15), and 0.22 (0.14, 0.36), respectively. In these 4 groups of women, the order of quadrant BA and DA were all the same (UO > UI > LO > LI), and there was no significant difference in BA, DA or PD among them (all p > 0.05).ConclusionsBreast cancer was most likely to occur in the UO quadrant, which was also the quadrant with highest BA and DA; but for women with tumors in other quadrants, the density in that quadrant was not the highest. Therefore, there was no direct association between quadrant density and tumor occurrence.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-017-3270-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Image enhancement plays an important role in Fingerprint Recognition System. In this paper fingerprint image enhancement method, a refined Gabor filter, is presented. This enhancement method can connect the ridge breaks, ensures the maximal gray values located at the ridge center and has the ability to compensate for the nonlinear deformations. The result shows it can improve the performance of image enhancement.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.