<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Deformable Registration of Differently-Weighted Breast Magnetic Resonance Images</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Tobias Boehler</string-name>
          <email>tobias.boehler@mevis.fraunhofer.de</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Sylvia Glasser</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Heinz-Otto Peitgen</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Fraunhofer MEVIS</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Bremen</addr-line>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff1">
          <label>1</label>
          <institution>Institut fu ̈r Simulation und Graphik, Otto-von-Guericke-Universita ̈t Magdeburg</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <fpage>94</fpage>
      <lpage>98</lpage>
      <abstract>
        <p>Dynamic breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) commonly acquires T1- and T2-weighted images. Joint inspection of both sequences in particular allows to distinguish between benign cyst-type and malignant lesions. However, in routine diagnostics both images are regarded independently, and immediate correlation is prevented by patient motion and tissue deformations. Differences in resolution and intensity distribution prevent a co-registration by established breast registration techniques. Instead, we propose to employ a deformable registration method that takes such differences into account. Accuracy of the method was confirmed through visual inspection and landmark-based assessment, indicating an average registration accuracy of 1:74 mm. We demonstrate how the proposed technique facilitates a joint visualization of both MRI-sequences, thereby offering valuable diagnostic support.</p>
      </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>Introduction</title>
      <p>
        The role of breast magnetic resonance imaging is that of an adjunct modality for
diagnostics. Although breast MRI has received an increased amount of attention
over the last decades, it remains supplemental to conventional x-ray
mammography (MG): sensitivity of breast MRI is high but its specificity is rather low,
while being more cost-intensive than radiographic mammography [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ]. MRI is
therefore frequently consulted to confirm the malignity or benignity of lesions.
      </p>
      <p>
        On the other hand, breast MRI allows to assess tissue-specific characteristics.
While MG primarily images tissue density, breast MRI also enables functional
and dynamic imaging. It is established practice to administer a ferro-magnetic
contrast agent (typically Gadolinium-based) to accentuate tissue vascularity.
The MR sequence of choice for this enhancement-visualization is the dynamic
contrast-enhanced (DCE) T1-sequence which typically acquires up to ten images
at distinct time points. Most workstation vendors allow to generate subtraction
images, maximum-intensity projections thereof, as well as cine views showing
all time points in succession. To remove spurious motion artifacts, a number of
dedicated correction strategies for such images have been developed [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        Contrarily, software support for T2-images is limited to a joint display with
T1-series. Lesions are recovered by time-consuming manual spatial correlation
of both images. A computerized exploitation of both intensity information is
frequently prevented by motion artifacts. Existing motion correction strategies
are often not readily applicable, as methods might assume identical
characteristics for tissue intensities, tissue contrasts or image extents [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ]. Particularly the
difference in image resolutions might prevent such applications.
      </p>
      <p>In this article we describe a deformable image registration method that aligns
T1- and T2-images of the breast. To the best of our knowledge no registration
method for this specific application has been proposed previously. The method
respects differences in resolution, anisotropy and intensity characteristics.
Accuracy of the method was estimated by a landmark-based quantitative estimation
of target registration errors. As a result, the computed spatial deformation
allows to superimpose T2-intensities on the anatomical image.
2</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>Material and Methods</title>
      <p>
        Disagreement of T1- and T2-sequences of a single patient results primarily from
patient motion. Unlike motion correction, sequence co-registration must account
for the different image resolutions, as well as intensity distributions. The
proposed registration scheme iteratively aligns a template image T to a given, fixed
reference image R. Regularity of the solution is enforced by the linear-elastic
operator [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
        ]. A finite-impulse response approximation of this operator is
employed, exploiting its eigenfunction representation [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ]. Derivation of the filter
response yields a non-symmetric, discrete filter kernel, and iterative convolution
of a displacement field U with this kernel explicitly enforces linear-elastic
regularity. For the proposed registration, a 7 × 7 × 7 filter kernel is employed, with
= 500 and = 0:1 set as elasticity moduli.
      </p>
      <p>
        The similarity of R and deformed Tˆ is estimated by the local cross correlation
(LCC) distance measure D(R; Tˆ) ∈ R, which exhibits robustness w.r.t.
intensity variations [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
        ]. The LCC measure is calculated in a 6-neighborhood around
each reference voxel, and locations for Tˆ are mapped in device coordinate space
independent of actual image resolution and voxel sizes. Updates of the
deformation field are estimated as first order derivatives of the distance function,
resembling artificial body forces. This update is regularized with the elastic
kernel and composed with previous deformations, similar to the demon’s algorithm
scheme [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
        ]. Registration is an iterative two-step process of force estimation and
regularization, where the updated deformation at iteration k is composed as
U k+1 = K ∗ [U k ◦
      </p>
      <p>Uukpdate]
(1)
and where K is the aforementioned regularization kernel. The ◦ operator denotes
the displacement field warping that composes the two corresponding image
transformations. Line search is performed in each iteration, starting with a predefined
step width ∈ R that is consecutively being reduced by a factor ∈ R until a
reduced error value is determined or the maximum number of search steps has
been reached. The resulting deformation field is then applied to the original
template image using linear intensity interpolation. Convergence is declared when
the distance measure satisfies a set of termination criteria. A multi-resolution
scheme is used to increase capture range and reduce computational complexity.
For both regularization and force estimation, Neumann-0 boundary conditions
are set in order to enable flexible boundaries. The implementation furthermore
exploits multi-threading to increase computational performance.
3</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>Results</title>
      <p>Initial validation of the proposed registration method was carried out on 10
clinical dynamic T1-weighted and T2-weighted MR images acquired with a Philips
Panorama MRI device. Both in-plane and out-of-plane resolution had been
adjusted for each dataset, varying from 4322 × 95 voxels to 5602 × 107 voxels, and
0:652 × 1:5 mm to 0:672 × 1:5 mm for the T1-images, as well as 5282 × 53 to
6402 × 57 voxels and 0:532 × 3:0 mm to 0:592 × 3:0 mm for the T2-images.
Generally, both in-plane resolution and slice-thickness are lower for T1-weighted
images. As discussed previously, it is therefore mandatory to incorporate actual
voxel extent to ensure accurate registration. The dynamic T1-series contained
five time points with 75s intervals between individual acquisitions. For the
T1sequence, a gradient-echo sequence with TR = 11:42 ms, TE = 6:0 ms and flip
angle 25◦ was employed. No fat-suppression had been selected. T2-weighted
imaging used a spin-echo sequence with TR = 7500 ms, TE = 140 ms and flip
angle of 90◦.
3.1</p>
      <sec id="sec-3-1">
        <title>Visual assessment</title>
        <p>Inspection of original and deformed images allows to investigate image
consistency. In order to compare different intensities of the T1- and T2-images,
isocontours are overlaid (Fig. 1). Contours are generated from T1-intensities and
superimposed on original and registered T2-images, focused in selected
fieldsof-view to highlight local differences. The actual visual inspection performed
on-screen displayed the entire image information, which is vital to assess
registration quality in remote regions, e.g., axillary lymph node locations.</p>
        <p>In addition to contour projections, the corresponding portions of the
displacement field are displayed as corresponding vectors in the rightmost column,
with each seventh vector shown. By magnitude, the displayed images contained
the largest displacements and therefore most pronounced image perturbations.
It is vital to ensure that larger deformations retain deformation regularity and
consistency, which is only assessable through the generated deformation field.
3.2</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-3-2">
        <title>Landmark distances</title>
        <p>
          Quantitative validation of the described method was achieved through
measurement of target registration errors [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">7</xref>
          ]. For each pair of T1- and T2-images at least
three corresponding pseudo-landmarks at characteristic positions were placed by
an expert breast radiologist. Euclidean distances between point pairs were
estimated (Tab. 1).
Using the proposed registration method a precise, accurate alignment of
T1and T2-images is accomplished. Visual inspection of transformed images and
corresponding displacement fields confirms an increased tissue alignment. The
results indicate that actual breast deformations are inherently non-linear, as the
local magnitude of displacements varies over the entire imaged breast (Fig. 1).
Deformation fields were smooth and folding-free.
        </p>
        <p>Quantitative evaluation of landmark errors shows that the mean distance is
reduced from 2:86 ± 1:38 mm to 1:74 ± 1:00 mm. Relative remaining distances
are reduced to 71:11% of their original value, while associated standard
deviation reaches 45:93%. It should be noted that the distance assessment considered
misplaced landmark positions. Disregard of such inaccurate placements would
result in even smaller remaining distances, albeit causing a validation bias. An
(a) T1-image
(b) T2-image
(c) T1 subtraction
initial joint visualization is shown in Fig. 2: after registration of T1- and
T2weighted MR-images, the latter is overlaid on the difference image computed
from two time points of the dynamic MRI. A region of interest is chosen
interactively, offering the radiologist an immediate and intuitive access to T2-data.
Using T1- and T2-data, the enhancing lesion is identified as being malignant.</p>
        <p>In summary, the proposed method allows to efficiently align T1- and
T2images with sub-voxel precision, thereby facilitating a joint analysis of both
sequences. A preliminary joint visualization was presented. Currently, further
quantitative evaluation and an assessment of the joint visualization are
conducted.</p>
        <p>Acknowledgement. The authors would like to thank Dr. Uta Preim,
University Hospital Magdeburg, for providing both images and annotations. Parts of
this work have been funded as part of the EU-project HAMAM, FP7-ICT, grant
no. 224538. Sylvia Glasser is part of the project “Efficient Visual Analysis of
Dynamic Medical Image Data” supported by the DFG Priority Program 1335:
“Scalable Visual Analytics” .</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          1.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Orel</surname>
            <given-names>SG</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Schnall</surname>
            <given-names>MD</given-names>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>MR imaging of the breast for the detection, diagnosis, and staging of breast cancer</article-title>
          .
          <source>Radiology</source>
          .
          <year>2001</year>
          ;
          <volume>220</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ):
          <fpage>13</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>30</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          2.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Guo</surname>
            <given-names>Y</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , et al.
          <article-title>Breast image registration techniques: a survey</article-title>
          .
          <source>Med Biol Eng Comput</source>
          .
          <year>2006</year>
          ;
          <volume>44</volume>
          :
          <fpage>15</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>26</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          3.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Modersitzki J. Numerical</surname>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Methods for Image Registration</article-title>
          . New York: Oxford University Press;
          <year>2004</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          4.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gramkow</surname>
            <given-names>C</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bro-Nielsen</surname>
            <given-names>M</given-names>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Comparison of three filters in the solution of the Navier-Stokes equation in registration</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Proc SCIA; 1997</source>
          . p.
          <fpage>795</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>802</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          5.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Netsch</surname>
            <given-names>T</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , et al.
          <article-title>Towards real-time multi-modality 3-D medical image registration</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Proc IEEE ICCV</source>
          ;
          <year>2001</year>
          . p.
          <fpage>718</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>25</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          6.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Vercauteren</surname>
            <given-names>T</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , et al.
          <article-title>Non-parametric diffeomorphic image registration with the demons algorithm</article-title>
          . Lect Notes Computer Sci.
          <year>2007</year>
          ;
          <volume>4792</volume>
          :
          <fpage>319</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>26</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          7.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Hajnal</surname>
            <given-names>JV</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Hawkes</surname>
            <given-names>DJ</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Hill</surname>
            <given-names>DLG</given-names>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Medical Image Registration</article-title>
          . CRC Press;
          <year>2001</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>