Medical image registration is an important task in medical image processing. It refers to the process of aligning data sets, possibly from different modalities (e.g., magnetic resonance and computed tomography), different time points (e.g., follow-up scans), and/or different subjects (in case of population studies). A large number of methods for image registration are described in the literature. Unfortunately, there is not one method that works for all applications. We have therefore developed elastix, a publicly available computer program for intensity-based medical image registration. The software consists of a collection of algorithms that are commonly used to solve medical image registration problems. The modular design of elastix allows the user to quickly configure, test, and compare different registration methods for a specific application. The command-line interface enables automated processing of large numbers of data sets, by means of scripting. The usage of elastix for comparing different registration methods is illustrated with three example experiments, in which individual components of the registration method are varied.

Nonrigid image registration is an important, but time-consuming task in medical image analysis. In typical neuroimaging studies, multiple image registrations are performed, i.e., for atlas-based segmentation or template construction. Faster image registration routines would therefore be beneficial. In this paper we explore acceleration of the image registration package by a combination of several techniques: (i) parallelization on the CPU, to speed up the cost function derivative calculation; (ii) parallelization on the GPU building on and extending the OpenCL framework from ITKv4, to speed up the Gaussian pyramid computation and the image resampling step; (iii) exploitation of certain properties of the B-spline transformation model; (iv) further software optimizations. The accelerated registration tool is employed in a study on diagnostic classification of Alzheimer's disease and cognitively normal controls based on T1-weighted MRI. We selected 299 participants from the publicly available Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative database. Classification is performed with a support vector machine based on gray matter volumes as a marker for atrophy. We evaluated two types of strategies (voxel-wise and region-wise) that heavily rely on nonrigid image registration. Parallelization and optimization resulted in an acceleration factor of 4–5x on an 8-core machine. Using OpenCL a speedup factor of 2 was realized for computation of the Gaussian pyramids, and 15–60 for the resampling step, for larger images. The voxel-wise and the region-wise classification methods had an area under the receiver operator characteristic curve of 88 and 90%, respectively, both for standard and accelerated registration. We conclude that the image registration package was substantially accelerated, with nearly identical results to the non-optimized version. The new functionality will become available in the next release of as open source under the BSD license.

An automatic method for delineating the prostate (including the seminal vesicles) in three-dimensional magnetic resonance scans is presented. The method is based on nonrigid registration of a set of prelabeled atlas images. Each atlas image is nonrigidly registered with the target patient image. Subsequently, the deformed atlas label images are fused to yield a single segmentation of the patient image. The proposed method is evaluated on 50 clinical scans, which were manually segmented by three experts. The Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) is used to quantify the overlap between the automatic and manual segmentations. We investigate the impact of several factors on the performance of the segmentation method. For the registration, two similarity measures are compared: Mutual information and a localized version of mutual information. The latter turns out to be superior (median DeltaDSC approximately equal 0.02, p < 0.01 with a paired two-sided Wilcoxon test) and comes at no added computational cost, thanks to the use of a novel stochastic optimization scheme. For the atlas fusion step we consider a majority voting rule and the "simultaneous truth and performance level estimation" algorithm, both with and without a preceding atlas selection stage. The differences between the various fusion methods appear to be small and mostly not statistically significant (p > 0.05). To assess the influence of the atlas composition, two atlas sets are compared. The first set consists of 38 scans of healthy volunteers. The second set is constructed by a leave-one-out approach using the 50 clinical scans that are used for evaluation. The second atlas set gives substantially better performance (DeltaDSC=0.04, p < 0.01), stressing the importance of a careful atlas definition. With the best settings, a median DSC of around 0.85 is achieved, which is close to the median interobserver DSC of 0.87. The segmentation quality is especially good at the prostate-rectum interface, where the segmentation error remains below 1 mm in 50% of the cases and below 1.5 mm in 75% of the cases.