A Hybrid Algorithm to Address Ambiguities in Deformable Image Registration for Radiation Therapy

Abstract

We proposed the use of a hybrid deformable image registration approach that combines compact-support radial basis functions (CSRBF) spline registration with intensity-based image registration. The proposed method first uses the pre-viously developed image intensity-based method to achieve voxel-by-voxel correspondences over the entire image re-gion. Next, for those areas of inaccurate registration, a sparse set of landmark correspondences was defined for local deformable image registration using a multi-step CSRBF approach. This hybrid registration takes advantage of both intensity-based method for automatic processing of entire images and the CSRBF spline method for fine adjustment over specific regions. The goal of using this hybrid registration is to locally control the quality of registration results in specific regions of interest with minimal human intervention. The major applications of this approach in radiation ther-apy are for the corrections of registration failures caused by various imaging artifacts resulting in, low image contrast, and non-correspondence situations where an object may not be imaged in both target and source images. Both synthetic and real patient data have been used to evaluate this hybrid method. We used contours mapping to validate the accuracy of this method on real patient image. Our studies demonstrated that this hybrid method could improve overall registra-tion accuracy with moderate overhead. In addition, we have also shown that the multi-step CSRBF registration proved to be more effective in handling large deformations while maintaining the smoothness of the transformation than origi-nal CSRBF.

Share and Cite:

Gao, S. , Zhang, Y. , Yang, J. , Wang, C. , Zhang, L. , Court, L. and Dong, L. (2012) A Hybrid Algorithm to Address Ambiguities in Deformable Image Registration for Radiation Therapy. International Journal of Medical Physics, Clinical Engineering and Radiation Oncology, 1, 50-59. doi: 10.4236/ijmpcero.2012.12007.

1. Introduction

Deformable image registration is becoming an important tool for tracking changes in a patient’s anatomy during radiotherapy [1-9]. The image-intensity method [10] and the landmark method [11] are two main categories used in radiation therapy. Landmark-based registration requires the identification of a sparse set of control-point pairs in both the source and target images. Therefore, it is usually tedious, and subject to inter-observer variations in identifying landmark points. This is especially true for three-dimensional (3D) registration requiring identification of a large number of landmark points. On the other hand, image intensity-based registration usually can be done automatically using image intensity information as the sole input parameters. However, image intensitybased registration is subject to intensity variations caused by various imaging artifacts. Because little user input is required in the intensity-based registration process, correspondence ambiguity in image intensity can be a problem in certain situations [12]. Correspondence ambiguity may lead to unrealistic deformations, a typical example of which is low intensity contrast within the prostate and bladder region, where intensity-based registration tends to produce an unsatisfactory motion field owing to the lack of image features. The landmark-based registration algorithm is less dependent of the underlying image content than intensity-based approach if a set of key feature correspondences can be reliably defined. However, automatic and accurate building a large number of feature correspondences across an image pair is generally a tough problem, and manually labeling the correspondences can be extremely labor-intensive. In addition, the validity of landmark-based registration depends on the number and distribution of control points.

To improve the robustness and accuracy of deformable image registration in certain clinical situations, we have proposed a hybrid registration approach that combines the landmark-based method, using compact-support radial basis functions (CSRBFs) [13] with the intensity-based diffusion method [2,3]. In this hybrid approach, CSRBF spline registration was used to establish correspondences over in the local region defined by a sparse set of landmarks; while the regions distant away from landmarks were registered using the image intensitybased diffusion method. We used a multi-step strategy in our implementation of CSRBFs that can handle large geometric deformations.

Though some researchers have proposed combination of image intensity and landmarks for registration [14-18], the major difference is that they applied both image intensityand landmark-based registrations to the entire image and calculated the registration by optimization of global cost function. In our proposed method, the image intensity-based registration applies to the entire image; while the landmark-based registration applies only to a local region where accurate registration results cannot be achieved using intensity-based registration alone. We also proposed a multi-step CSRBF registration method that has proven to be robust in handling large deformations and insensitive to the registration parameters used.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Intensity-Based Diffusion Registration

Image intensity-based registration is also called voxel similarity-based registration because the registration metric and the cost function is calculated directly using the voxel-intensity values of the two images to be registered, i.e., source S(x) image and target T(x) image [10]. The registration process involves transforming the source image to best match the target image. The sum of squared-intensity differences (SSD) between source and target images is usually used in conjunction with a smoothness constraint, which can simulate various mechanical property of the material. For example, elastic image registration simulates the linear elastic material, and fluid image registration [19-21] simulates deformations in fluid dynamics. A generic diffusion-type image registration model can be constructed using the Tikhonov regularization constraint [2,3,17]. Thirion’s [22] demons registration algorithm [8,9] can be regarded as an approximation of the diffusion registration model using isotropic filtering.

We previously implemented a variational diffusion registration [2], where the displacement vector field uk (k = x, y, z in the Cartesian coordinate system) can be determined by solving the registration equation [2,3,17].

(1)

where a is the smooth parameter; S(xk) and T(xk) are the source and target image intensities, respectively; and . The displacement fields are the solutions of the nonlinear partial differential equations in Equation (1), and these equations can be solved numerically using a multigrid method [2].

2.2. Landmark-Based Registration Using CSRBF Spline

CSRBF spline registration requires user intervention to establish the correspondences between the same object in both source and target images. The main steps in landmark based registration algorithm consist of identifying pairs of corresponding landmarks in images, computing the appropriate transformation parameters, and then interpolating transformation fields for positions not on the landmarks.

The properties of radial basis functions (RBFs) are well defined and have proven to be efficient for interpolation [23]. Researchers have proposed using many different RBFs for landmark-based image registration with or without compact support[13]. The main disadvantage of RBFs without compact support is that the resultant transformation acts as a global function so that a single landmark pair would affect entire image region, a typical example is thin-plate spline (TPS). The transformations generated by CSRBF are localized, and the impacts of landmarks on a certain location are inversely proportional to the distances to the landmarks.  In our implementation, we selected the Wendland y function [23] as the RBF with the spatial-support parameter a for local registration:

(2)

where

(3)

This function is positively defined in a 3D space and has C2 continuity (second derivative continuity). An RBF is based on a scalar radius r and is symmetric around a control point. The smaller the value of a, the more local the confinement of for at the landmark control points. To handle large deformations using CSRBF spline registration, a large a value may be needed [13]. Therefore, selection of this a parameter must be a compromise between the requirement for local confinement and the existence of large deformations in certain clinical situations.

CSRBF spline registration initially identifies the corresponding coordinate locations (control points) in both source and target images. The control-point pairs are then used to determine a coordinate transformation (mapping) between two images. The set of control points in the source image can be denoted as, and the corresponding control-point set in the target image can be denoted as. A successful registration should map every point in to the corresponding. Transformation of the mapping function can be represented as a linear combination of the CSRBFs of the distance between two control-point sets:

(4)

where i, j = 1, ···, N, and N is the number of control points. For a given set of control points, the transformation coefficients are the solutions for this linear system:

(5)

where and.

Once the transformation coefficients are obtained as depicted in Equation (5), the mapping between any points x other than the control points is given as follows:

(6)

where x' is the corresponding point of x, and

is the displacement field for point x. The displacement fields generally depend on both the number and spatial distribution of control points. For a given set of controlpoint pairs, the displacement fields depend on the value of the compact support parameter a. Usually, a small a value makes the transformation more local to the control points, and the deformation of the object is relatively small. In certain clinical situations, a large a value is required to handle large deformations in a small region. When a large a value is used, the CSRBF spline transformation may influence the outer regions away from the area defined by the control points.

2.3. Multi-Step Registration Using CSRBF Spline

With large deformations, landmark-based registration may produce “cross-over” of the grid, as shown in Figure 5(c). Although a large support size can be used for regions away from the region of interest may lead to unrealistic displacement fields such as that caused by bone deformation as shown in Figure 4 (c)-(d). Joshi and Miller [24] mathematically proved the existence of diffeomorphism in a set of landmark correspondences with large deformations and derived an iterative algorithm. However, we argue that strict diffeomorphism may be overconstrained in many situations. Moreover, as a clinical solution for adaptive radiation therapy, our goal is to avoid “cross-over” in deformation with an affordable computational cost rather than solve a strict topologypreserve map. Therefore, we implemented a heuristic divide-and-conquer procedure to handle large deformation across patient anatomy while maintaining the locality of the transformation.

After selection of the control-point pairs, the distances between the corresponding points roughly represent the deformation of the subject from the source image to the target image. Using one-step registration would necessitate a large compact support parameter a for large deformation, which could violate the locality [13] of the transformation. In the present study, we implemented a multi-step CSRBF splines. We could artificially reduce the distances between the source and target control points by creating intermediate “virtual” control points between them as illustrated in Figure 1. The intermediate virtual control points are coordinates of points between source and target control points; they are not actual points identified in the images. The main reason for using these intermediate virtual control points is to reduce the distances between the source and intermediate points, making the transformation more local and topologically preserved when using Equation (4). At the end of this multi-step CSRBF registration process, the final control points are the same as the landmark points identified by the user.

The multi-step registration initially registers the source control points (real points) to the virtual control points

Figure 1. 2D representation of a multi-step CSRBF spline registration using two intermediate virtual control points (blue and yellow circles with crossed marks). The red open circles with the solid curve represent the source image, and the solid black dots are linked landmarks on the target image (dashed curve).

, which are closest to the source control points. Next, the previous virtual control point set is used as the source set and registered to the next virtual control point set. This procedure is repeated until the final step, which registers the last set of virtual control points to the target control point set. The number of registration steps is n+1. In each step of the registration process, the same compact support parameter value a is used. The transformation coefficients are obtained for each step by repeatedly solving Equation (5), and these coefficients are used sequentially to calculate the displacement fields of every point using Equation (6) in the region of interest. The final displacement field between the source and target images is the cumulative displacement field obtained in the multiple steps.

2.4. The Hybrid Registration Algorithm

The image intensity-based deformable registration algorithm [2,9] works well for many clinical applications when the image quality is good and source and target images are relatively similar. The hybrid registration algorithm is designed for situations when the image quality and / or source and target similarity are inadequate for successful registration using the image intensity-based algorithm alone. Therefore, prior to the use of the hybrid registration, we first registered the image pair using intensity-based diffusion registration algorithm. We used the hybrid registration only when the diffusion registration could not produce satisfactory results.

As illustrated in the flowchart in Figure 2, the hybrid registration method includes four essential steps: 1) registering the entire region of interest using image intensity-based diffusion registration, 2) manually identifying control-point pairs in regions in which the previous registration results were considered inadequate, 3) using the multi-step CSRBF spline registration algorithm to register the local region of the image according to the predefined control-point pairs, and 4) combining the displacement fields from multi-step CSRBF spline registration with that those obtained from the diffusion registration.

Figure 2. Diagram of the proposed hybrid deformable image registration approach.

The combination of two displacement fields should satisfy the smooth constraints for the two registration methods, and the local registration should not affect global registration of the entire region. In our implementation, we first used a spline function to connect all of the landmark points to calculate a closed 3D volume. We marked the interior of this 3D volume as the “in-field” volume, where the displacement field was determined solely using the CSRBF spline registration method. We then expanded the 3D surface of this in-field volume to create a “transition zone” with the width of the expansion equal to the compact support parameter a. Within the transition zone, the displacement field was determined according to the weighted average of both of the displacement fields calculated using the intensity-based method and the landmark-based method at each position:

(7)

where the weighting function can be determined using a linear function of Euclidean distance transformation [25,26] between the point of interest x and the 3D surface of the in-field volume:

(8)

where the compact support parameter a normalizes the weighting function to a value within [0,1]. This is illustrated in the two-dimensional (2D) diagram in Figure 3. This implementation allows for CSRBF spline registration in the local region specified by the control points, whereas the image intensity-based diffusion registration controls the region away from the control points with a smooth transition in the transition zone.

Figure 3. A 2D diagram showing the combination of landmark-based and image intensity-based registration. The peripheral landmark points form an in-field area (shaded) in which the displacement field was determined using the landmark-based registration method only. A transition zone is identified by expanding the in-field area using the registration parameter a. In the transition zone, the displacement field is computed based on the weighted average of the displacement fields with both methods. In the “out-field” area, the displacement field was determined solely using the intensity-based registration method.

2.5. Patient Data

Computed tomography (CT) images for four patients with prostate cancer, two patients with lung cancer, and one patient with head and neck cancer were used to test the accuracy and efficiency of the hybrid deformable image registration method. For the prostate cancer patients, daily (target) CT images were acquired using a CT-on-rails system (EXaCT; Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA). For the lung cancer patients, four-dimensional (4D) CT images were used to test the registration of tumor sliding along chest wall. The 4D CT data were reconstructed using CT scans acquired synchronously with the respiratory signals representing 3D CT data sets at various breathing phases (total, 10 phases). In 4D CT images, the 0% phase CT images (denoted by T0) and 50% phase CT images (denoted by T5), corresponding to the end of inspiration and expiration scans, respectively, and the largest range of tumor motion owing to respiration appears in the CT images in these two phases.

2.6. Validation Method

We used the results of the deformable image registration to determine whether this transformation can correctly auto-delineate the daily target volume. In this procedure the manually drawn contours in the source CT image were transformed to the contour in target CT image using the displacement field calculated from deformable image registration. The deformed contours in the target image automatically segmented the anatomic structures in the target image. Precise registration led to the deformed contours correctly fitting the corresponding structures in the target image. Therefore, the deformed contours facilitated evaluation of the image registration algorithm. The deformable image registration methods were implemented using the C++ programming language. All tests were run on an Intel Pentium IV (2.8 GHz)-equipped personal computer.

3. Results

3.1. Single-step vs Multi-Step CSRBF Spline Registration

In the multi-step CSRBF registration algorithm, the number of steps is specified by the user and depends mainly on the distances between source and target control points. Our experience showed that a four-step procedure is reasonable for challenging cases with very large deformations.

Figure 4 shows the differences in one-, two-, threeand four-step registration using an artificial cuboid in the prostate cancer CT images. We identified 18 controlpoint pairs on the edges of the rectangle denoting the cuboid in one particular slice. This figure demonstrates

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1] Bharatha, A, Hirose, M, Hata, N, et al. Evaluation of three-dimensional finite element-based deformable registration of preand intraoperative prostate imaging. Med. Phys. 2001;28:2551-2560.
[2] Gao, S, Zhang, L, Wang, H, et al. A deformable image registration method to handle distended rectums in prostate cancer radiotherapy. Med. Phys. 2006;33:3304-3312.
[3] Lu, W, Chen, ML, Olivera, GH, Ruchala, KJ, Mackie, TR. Fast free-form deformable registration via calculus of variations. Phys Med Biol 2004;49: 3067-3087.
[4] Mackie, TR, Kapatoes, J, Ruchala, K, et al. Image guidance for precise conformal radiotherapy. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics. 2003;56:89-105.
[5] Rietzel, E, Chen, GT, Choi, NC, Willet, CG. Four-dimensional image-based treatment planning: Target volume segmentation and dose calculation in the presence of respiratory motion. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, 2005;61:1535-1550.
[6] Sarrut, D, V. Boldea, S. Miguet, C. Ginestet. Simulation of four-dimensional CT images from deformable registration between inhale and exhale breath-hold CT scans. Med. Phys. 2006;33:605-617.
[7] Schreibmann, E, G. T. Chen, Xing, L. Image interpolation in 4D CT using a BSpline deformable registration model. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006;64:1537-1550.
[8] Wang, H, Dong, L, Lii, MF, et al. Implementation and validation of a three-dimensional deformable registration algorithm for targeted prostate cancer radiotherapy. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics 2005;61:725-735.
[9] Wang, H, Dong, L, O'Daniel, J, et al. Validation of an accelerated 'demons' algorithm for deformable image registration in radiation therapy. Phys. Med. Biol. 2005;50:2887-2905.
[10] Hill, DLG, Batchelor, PG, Holden, M, J., HD. Medical image registration. Phys. Med. Biol. 2001;46:R1-45.
[11] Rohr, K. Landmark-Based Image Analysis: Using Geo-metric and Intensity Models. Dordrecht, Boston: Kluwer Academic. 2001.
[12] Crum, WR, Griffin, LD, Hill, DL, Hawkes, DJ. Zen and the art of medical image registration: correspondence, homology, and quality. Neuroimage 2003;20:1425-1437.
[13] Fornefett, M, Rohr, K, Stiehl, HS. Radial basis functions with compact support for elastic registration of medical images. Image and Vision Computing 2001;19:87-96.
[14] Azar, A, Xu, C, Pennec, X, Ayache, N. An interactive hybrid non-rigid registration framework for 3D medical images. 3rd IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging: Nano to Macro; page: 824- 827 2006.
[15] Hartkens, T, Hill, DLG, Castellano-Smith, AD, et al. Using points and surfaces to improve voxel-based non-rigid registration. Lecture Notes in Computer Science; Vol. 2489, pp.565-572: springer. 2002.
[16] Johnson, HJ, Christensen, GE. Consistent landmark and intensity-based image registration. IEEE Trans. Medical Imaging 2002;21:450-461.
[17] Modersitzki, J. Numerical Methods for Image Registration: Oxford University Press. 2004.
[18] P. Cachier, J. F. Mangin, X. Pennec, et al. Multisubject Nonrigid Registration of Brain MRI Using Intensity and Geometric Features In: Viergever WNaM, editor. Fourth International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention, Utrecht, The Netherlands: springer-Verlag. 2001;734-742.
[19] Christensen, GE, Rabbitt, RD, Miller, MI. Deformable templates using large deformation kinematics. IEEE Trans. Imag. Process. 1996;5:1435-1447.
[20] D'Agostino, E, Maes, F, Vandermeulen, D, Suetens, P. A viscous fluid model for multimodal nonrigid image registration using mutual information. Med. Image Anal. 2003;7:565-575.
[21] Foskey, M, Davis, B, Goyal, L, et al. Large deformation 3D image registration in image-guided radiation therapy. Phys. Med. Biol. 2005;50:5869-5892.
[22] Thirion, J. Image matching as a diffusion process: an analogy with Maxwell's demons. Medical Image Analysis 1998;2:243-260.
[23] Wendland, H. Piecewise polynomial, positive definite and compactly supported radial functions of minimal degree. Advances in Computational Mathematics 1995;4:389-396.
[24] Borgefors, G. On digital distance transforms in three dimensions. Computer Vision and Image Understanding 1996;64:368-376.
[25] Rosenfeld, A, Pfaltz, J. Distance functions in digital pictures. Pattern Recognit 1968;1:33-61.
[26] Joshi, SC, Miller, MI. Landmark matching via large de-formation diffeomorphisms. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 2000;9:1357-1370.
[27] Hajnal, JV, Hawkes, DJ, Hill, DLG, (eds). Medical Image Registration. Boca Raton: CRC Press. 2001.
[28] Bookstein, FL. Principal warps: thin-plate splines and the decomposition of deformations. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 1989;11:567-585.
[29] Rohr, K, Stiehl, HS, Sprengel, R, Buzug, TM, Weese, J, Kuhn, MH. Landmark-based elastic registration using approximating thin-plate splines. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 2001;20:526-534.
[30] Rohr, K, Fornefett, M, Stiehl, HS. Spline-based elastic image registration: integration of landmark errors and orientation attributes. Computer Vision & Image Under-standing 2003;90:153-168.
[31] Arad, N, Dyn, N, Reisfeld, D, Yeshurun, Y. Image warp-ing by radial basis functions: applications to facial expressions. CVGIP: Graphical Models and Image Processing 1994;56:161-172.
[32] Wachowiak, MP, X. Wang, A. Fenster, Peters, TM. Compact Support Radial Basis Functions for Soft Tissue Deformation. Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging: From Nano to Macro, Arlington, VA, USA. 2004;1259-1262.
[33] Kohlrausch, J, Rohr, K, Stiehl, S. A new class of elastic body splines for nonrigid registration of medical Images. J. Math. Imaging Vision 2005;23:253–280.
[34] Pekar, V, Gladilin, E, Rohr, K. An adaptive irregular grid approach for 3D deformable image registration. Phys. Med. Biol. 2006;51:361–377.

Copyright © 2024 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.