Premium
Effects of x‐ray and CT image enhancements on the robustness and accuracy of a rigid 3D/2D image registration
Author(s) -
Kim Jinkoo,
Yin FangFang,
Zhao Yang,
Kim Jae Ho
Publication year - 2005
Publication title -
medical physics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.473
H-Index - 180
eISSN - 2473-4209
pISSN - 0094-2405
DOI - 10.1118/1.1869592
Subject(s) - histogram equalization , robustness (evolution) , imaging phantom , image registration , histogram , artificial intelligence , computer vision , adaptive histogram equalization , translation (biology) , preprocessor , computer science , histogram matching , mathematics , nuclear medicine , image (mathematics) , medicine , biochemistry , chemistry , messenger rna , gene
A rigid body three‐dimensional/two‐dimensional (3D/2D) registration method has been implemented using mutual information, gradient ascent, and 3D texturemap‐based digitally reconstructed radiographs. Nine combinations of commonly used x‐ray and computed tomography (CT) image enhancement methods, including window leveling, histogram equalization, and adaptive histogram equalization, were examined to assess their effects on accuracy and robustness of the registration method. From a set of experiments using an anthropomorphic chest phantom, we were able to draw several conclusions. First, the CT and x‐ray preprocessing combination with the widest attraction range was the one that linearly stretched the histograms onto the entire display range on both CT and x‐ray images. The average attraction ranges of this combination were 71.3 mm and 61.3 deg in the translation and rotation dimensions, respectively, and the average errors were 0.12 deg and 0.47 mm . Second, the combination of the CT image with tissue and bone information and the x‐ray images with adaptive histogram equalization also showed subvoxel accuracy, especially the best in the translation dimensions. However, its attraction ranges were the smallest among the examined combinations (on average 36 mm and 19 deg ). Last the bone‐only information on the CT image did not show convergency property to the correct registration.