Dataset Information

Contributions of imprecision in PET-MRI rigid registration to imprecision in amyloid PET SUVR measurements.

ABSTRACT: Quantitative measurement of β-amyloid from amyloid PET scans typically relies on localizing target and reference regions by image registration to MRI. In this work, we present a series of simulations where 50 small random perturbations of starting location and orientation were applied to each subject's PET scan, and rigid registration using spm_coreg was performed between each perturbed PET scan and its corresponding MRI. We then measured variation in the output PET-MRI registrations and how this variation affected the resulting SUVR measurements. We performed these experiments using scans of 1196 participants, half using 18F florbetapir and half using 11C PiB. From these experiments, we measured the magnitude of the imprecision in the rigid registration steps used to localize measurement regions, and how this contributes to the overall imprecision in SUVR measurements. Unexpectedly, we found for both tracers that the imprecision in these measurements depends on the degree of amyloid tracer uptake, and thus also indirectly on Alzheimer's disease clinical status. We then examined common choices of reference regions, and we show that SUVR measurements using supratentorial white matter references are relatively resistant to this source of error. We also show that the use of partial volume correction further magnifies the effects of registration imprecision on SUVR measurements. Together, these results suggest that this rigid registration step is an attractive target for future work in improving measurement techniques. Hum Brain Mapp 38:3323-3336, 2017. © 2017 The Authors Human Brain Mapping Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

SUBMITTER: Schwarz CG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5518286 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose ([18F]FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) is a valuable tool for monitoring response to therapy in oncology. In longitudinal studies, however, patients are not scanned in exactly the same position. Rigid and non-rigid image registration can be applied in order to reuse baseline volumes of interest (VOI) on consecutive studies of the same patient. The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of various image registration strategies on standardized uptake value (SUV) and metabolic volume test-retest variability (TRT). METHODS:Test-retest whole-body [18F]FDG PET/CT scans were collected retrospectively for 11 subjects with advanced gastrointestinal malignancies (colorectal carcinoma). Rigid and non-rigid image registration techniques with various degrees of locality were applied to PET, CT, and non-attenuation corrected PET (NAC) data. VOI were drawn independently on both test and retest scans. VOI drawn on test scans were projected onto retest scans and the overlap between projected VOI and manually drawn retest VOI was quantified using the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC). In addition, absolute (unsigned) differences in TRT of SUVmax, SUVmean, metabolic volume and total lesion glycolysis (TLG) were calculated in on one hand the test VOI and on the other hand the retest VOI and projected VOI. Reference values were obtained by delineating VOIs on both scans separately. RESULTS:Non-rigid PET registration showed the best performance (median DSC: 0.82, other methods: 0.71-0.81). Compared with the reference, none of the registration types showed significant absolute differences in TRT of SUVmax, SUVmean and TLG (p > 0.05). Only for absolute TRT of metabolic volume, significant lower values (p < 0.05) were observed for all registration strategies when compared to delineating VOIs separately, except for non-rigid PET registrations (p = 0.1). Non-rigid PET registration provided good volume TRT (7.7%) that was smaller than the reference (16%). CONCLUSION:In particular, non-rigid PET image registration showed good performance similar to delineating VOI on both scans separately, and with smaller TRT in metabolic volume estimates.

Project description:The primary aim of this study is to investigate the performance difference of rigid and nonrigid registration schemes in matching corresponding pulmonary nodules depicted on sequential chest computed tomography (CT) examinations.A gradient descent based rigid registration algorithm with scaling was developed and it handled the involved geometric transformations (i.e., translation, rescaling, shearing, and rotation) separately instead of optimizing them in a single pass. Given two lung CT examinations, the scaling and translation parameters were simply estimated from the lung volume dimensions (e.g., size and mass center), while the rotation parameters were optimized progressively using gradient descent. To investigate the performance difference of rigid and nonrigid schemes in pulmonary nodule registration, the well-known nonrigid Demons algorithm was implemented and tested along with the developed schemes against 60 diverse low-dose clinical lung CT examinations with average 2-yr follow-up scans. A verified cancer and its correspondence in the follow-up scan as well as their spatial locations (mass center) were identified in each examination. In addition to the computational efficiency, the accuracy of these registration procedures was assessed by computing the Euclidean distances between the corresponding nodules after the registration. To demonstrate the advantage of the developed algorithm, the authors also implemented a fast iterative closest point (ICP) based rigid algorithm and compared their performance.Our experiments on the collected chest CT examinations showed that the nodule registration errors in 3D Euclidean distance for the developed rigid affine approach, the traditional ICP algorithm, and the refining nonrigid Demons algorithm were 9.6, 9.8, and 10.0 mm, respectively, and the corresponding computational costs in time were 5, 300, and 55 s, respectively.A rigid solution may be preferred in practice for the pulmonary nodule registration in longitudinal studies because of its relatively high efficiency and sufficient accuracy for the clinical need.

Dataset Information

Contributions of imprecision in PET-MRI rigid registration to imprecision in amyloid PET SUVR measurements.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets