Open AccessThe feasibility of endoscopy-CT image registration in the head and neck without prospective endoscope tracking
Author(s) -
W. Scott Ingram,
Jinzhong Yang,
Beth M. Beadle,
Richard Wendt,
Arvind Rao,
Xin A. Wang,
Laurence E. Court
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
plos one
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.99
H-Index - 332
ISSN - 1932-6203
DOI - 10.1371/journal.pone.0177886
Subject(s) - endoscope , computer vision , artificial intelligence , imaging phantom , endoscopy , image registration , frame (networking) , computer science , tracking (education) , virtual image , similarity (geometry) , medicine , radiology , nuclear medicine , medical physics , image (mathematics) , psychology , telecommunications , pedagogy
Purpose Endoscopic examinations are frequently-used procedures for patients with head and neck cancer undergoing radiotherapy, but radiation treatment plans are created on computed tomography (CT) scans. Image registration between endoscopic video and CT could be used to improve treatment planning and analysis of radiation-related normal tissue toxicity. The purpose of this study was to explore the feasibility of endoscopy-CT image registration without prospective physical tracking of the endoscope during the examination. Methods A novel registration technique called Location Search was developed. This technique uses physical constraints on the endoscope’s view direction to search for the virtual endoscope coordinates that maximize the similarity between the endoscopic video frame and the virtual endoscopic image. Its performance was tested on phantom and patient images and compared to an established registration technique, Frame-To-Frame Tracking. Results In phantoms, Location Search had average registration errors of 0.55 ± 0.60 cm for point measurements and 0.29 ± 0.15 cm for object surface measurements. Frame-To-Frame Tracking achieved similar results on some frames, but it failed on others due to the virtual endoscope becoming lost. This weakness was more pronounced in patients, where Frame-To-Frame tracking could not make it through the nasal cavity. On successful patient video frames, Location Search was able to find endoscope positions with an average distance of 0.98 ± 0.53 cm away from the ground truth positions. However, it failed on many frames due to false similarity matches caused by anatomical structural differences between the endoscopic video and the virtual endoscopic images. Conclusions Endoscopy-CT image registration without prospective physical tracking of the endoscope is possible, but more development is required to achieve an accuracy suitable for clinical translation.