Projects:RegistrationLibrary:RegLib C03

From NAMIC Wiki
Revision as of 20:32, 25 January 2010 by Meier (talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search
Home < Projects:RegistrationLibrary:RegLib C03

Back to ARRA main page
Back to Registration main page
Back to Registration Use-case Inventory

Slicer Registration Library Exampe #3: Diffusion Weighted Image Volume: align with structural reference MRI

this is the fixed reference image. All images are aligned into this space lleft this is the moving image. The transform is calculated by matching this to the reference image this is a passive image to which the calculated transform is applied. It is a label-map in the same space as the moving FLAIR image LEGEND

lleft this indicates the reference image that is fixed and does not move. All other images are aligned into this space and resolution
lleft this indicates the moving image that determines the registration transform.
lleft this indicates images that passively move into the reference space, i.e. they have the transform applied but do not contribute to the calculation of the transform.

lleft T2 lleft DTI Baseline lleft DTI volume
1mm isotropic
256 x 256 x 146
RAS
1.2mm isotropic
256 x 256 x 116
RAS
1.2mm isotropic
256 x 256 x 116
RAS

Objective / Background

This is a typical example of DTI processing. Goal is to align the DTI image with a structural scan that provides accuracte anatomical reference. The DTI contains acquisition-related distortion and insufficient contrast to discern anatomical detail.

Keywords

MRI, brain, head, intra-subject, DTI, DWI

Input Data

  • Button red fixed white.jpgreference/fixed : T2w FSE,
  • Button green moving white.jpg moving: Baseline image of acquired DTI volume, corresponds to T2w MRI , 0.9375 x 0.9375 x 1.4 mm voxel size, oblique
  • 20px moving: Tensor data of DTI volume, oblique, same orientation as Baseline image. The result Xform will be applied to this volume.

Registration Results

after affine alignment

Download


Discussion: Registration Challenges

  • accuracy is the critical criterion here. We need the registration error (residual misalignment) to be smaller than the change we want to measure/detect. Agreement on what constitutes good alignment can therefore vary greatly.
  • the two images have strong differences in coil inhomogeneity. This affects less the registration quality but hampers evaluation. Most of the difference does not become apparent until after registration in direct juxtaposition. Bias field correction beforehand is recommended.
  • we have slightly different voxel sizes
  • if the pathology change is substantial it might affect the registration.

Discussion: Key Strategies

  • the two images have identical contrast, hence we consider "sharper" cost functions, such as NormCorr or MeanSqrd
  • general practice is to register the follow-up to the baseline. However here the follow-up has slightly higher resolution. From an image quality/data perspective it would be better to use the highest resolution image as your fixed/reference. But here follow the most common convention, i.e. fixed image is the baseline.
  • because we seek to assess/quantify regional size change, we must use a rigid (6DOF) scheme, i.e. we must exclude scaling.
  • if the pathology change is soo large that it might affect the registration, we should mask it out. The simplest way to do this is to build a box ROI from the ROItool and feed it as input to the registration. Remember that masking does not mean that masked areas aren't matched, they just do not contribute to the cost function driving the registration, but move along passively. Next more involved level would be to outline the tumor. If a segmentation is available, you can use that.
  • these two images are not too far apart initially, so we reduce the default of expected translational misalignment
  • because accuracy is more important than speed here, we increase the sampling rate from the default 2% to 15%.
  • we also expect minimal differences in scale & distortion: so we can either set the expected values to 0 or run a rigid registration
  • we test the result in areas with good anatomical detail and contrast, far away from the pathology. With rigid body motion a local measure of registration accuracy is representative and can give us a valid limit of detectable change.