Performance Evaluation of Deformable Image Registration Algorithms Using Computed Tomography of Multiple Lung Metastases

Abstract

Purpose: Various deformable image registration (DIR) methods have been used to evaluate organ deformations in 4-dimensional computed tomography (4D CT) images scanned during the respiratory motions of a patient. This study assesses the performance of 10 DIR algorithms using 4D CT images of 5 patients with fiducial markers (FMs) implanted during the postoperative radiosurgery of multiple lung metastases. Methods: To evaluate DIR algorithms, 4D CT images of 5 patients were used, and ground-truths of FMs and tumors were generated by physicians based on their medical expertise. The positions of FMs and tumors in each 4D CT phase image were determined using 10 DIR algorithms, and the deformed results were compared with ground-truth data. Results: The target registration errors (TREs) between the FM positions estimated by optical flow algorithms and the ground-truth ranged from 1.82 ± 1.05 to 1.98 ± 1.17 mm, which is within the uncertainty of the ground-truth position. Two algorithm groups, namely, optical flow and demons, were used to estimate tumor positions with TREs ranging from 1.29 ± 1.21 to 1.78 ± 1.75 mm. With respect to the deformed position for tumors, for the 2 DIR algorithm groups, the maximum differences of the deformed positions for gross tumor volume tracking were approximately 4.55 to 7.55 times higher than the mean differences. Errors caused by the aforementioned difference in the Hounsfield unit values were also observed. Conclusions: We quantitatively evaluated 10 DIR algorithms using 4D CT images of 5 patients and compared the results with ground-truth data. The optical flow algorithms showed reasonable FM-tracking results in patient 4D CT images. The iterative optical flow method delivered the best performance in this study. With respect to the tumor volume, the optical flow and demons algorithms delivered the best performance.

A novel evaluation model of image registration for cone‐beam computed tomography guided lung cancer radiotherapy

“…The accuracy of CBCT‐guided radiotherapy positioning is influenced by various factors, primarily observer‐related differences in judgment, 2 , 3 the quality of images used for registration, 4 , 5 , 6 different registration algorithms, 7 , 8 , 9 and the choice of registration regions. 10 , 11 , 12 Some studies have emphasized that selecting different regions of interest (ROIs) for online image registration in planning images can lead to varying displacements. Incorrect displacement adjustments might not only fail to correct errors in dose distribution during treatment but also result in inadequate dosing to the target or excessive radiation exposure to organs at risk (OARs).…”