1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Automated 2D–3D registration of portal images and CT data using line-segment enhancement
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1118/1.2975143
/content/aapm/journal/medphys/35/10/10.1118/1.2975143
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aapm/journal/medphys/35/10/10.1118/1.2975143

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

Estimation of patient setup deviation with the lines algorithm using images in the AP view. An overlay of the portal image and the DRR in its original pose for weeks 1–8 is shown in the first and third columns. Images of the fused portal image and the DRR computed at the estimated pose for weeks 1–8 are shown in the second and fourth columns. Linear features from the portal image are green in color and features from the DRR are red. At alignment, linear features in both images should overlap minimizing the amount of red and green structures in the fused registered images and maximizing the amount of yellow. Note that the bony anatomy was registered correctly for all . The images displayed here do not include the correction for the treatment field offset.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

An overlay of the portal image and the DRR in its original pose for weeks 6 and 7 is shown in the first column. Images of the fused portal image and the DRR computed at the estimated pose for these using the AP and RL image separately are shown in the second and third columns, respectively. Linear features from the portal image are green in color and features from the DRR are red. The AP-only registration algorithm was able to recover the pelvic tilt present in week 6 accurately, while the RL-only registration algorithm incorrectly aligned the femurs instead of the pubic symphysis and sciatic notch. The registration with the lateral image was wrong by approximately 2° and in its estimation of the rotation around the right-lateral axis and the translation along the posterior–anterior axis, respectively. No femur motion or pelvic tilt was observed in week 7. In this case, estimates of setup deviations obtained with the AP image and lateral image were comparable.

Tables

Generic image for table
TABLE I.

Table of displacements and registration errors for poses 1 through 15. The true pose, estimated pose, and registration error in estimating the true pose are listed for each of the six transformation parameters. The correlation coefficient, , obtained at the estimated pose, the total distance moved, , and the total registration error, , are also shown.

Generic image for table
TABLE II.

Mean, standard deviation, minimum, maximum, and median of the absolute value of the registration errors for each of the six transformation parameters and also for the total registration error for poses 1 through 15.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aapm/journal/medphys/35/10/10.1118/1.2975143
2008-09-10
2014-04-25
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Automated 2D–3D registration of portal images and CT data using line-segment enhancement
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aapm/journal/medphys/35/10/10.1118/1.2975143
10.1118/1.2975143
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM