2000
DOI: 10.1016/s1361-8415(00)00014-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An algorithmic overview of surface registration techniques for medical imaging

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
205
0
3

Year Published

2002
2002
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 352 publications
(208 citation statements)
references
References 76 publications
0
205
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Various automatic registration methods are conceivable 26, 27, 28 and should be compared particularly in terms of their applicability to patient data. In this phantom study, we have selected the rigid coherent point drift registration (CPD),29 which only translates and rotates the dataset of the determined dwell positions by an iterative registration routine minimizing the 3D distance of the dwell position pairs.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Various automatic registration methods are conceivable 26, 27, 28 and should be compared particularly in terms of their applicability to patient data. In this phantom study, we have selected the rigid coherent point drift registration (CPD),29 which only translates and rotates the dataset of the determined dwell positions by an iterative registration routine minimizing the 3D distance of the dwell position pairs.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Automatic selection of correspondences for nonparametric shape representations has been explored in the context of surface registration [6], but because such methods are typically limited to pairwise correspondences and assume a fixed set of surface point samples, they are not su cient for the analysis of sets of segmented volumes. While the sliding landmark method of Dalal, et al does not assume fixed surface correspondences, it still relies on a pair-wise registrations to a fixed template, which must be chosen by another procedure in advance.…”
Section: Shape Representationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The majority of (semi-) automatic approaches for registering the endoscopic image data with 3D anatomical data acquired pre-or intra-operatively are either marker-based (Baumhauer et al, 2008;Falk et al, 2005;Ieiri et al, 2011;Marvik et al, 2004;Megali et al, 2008;Mourgues et al, 2003;Simpfendorfer et al, 2011;Suzuki et al, 2008) or use external tracking devices that are initially calibrated with respect to the imaging modality (Ukimura and Gill, 2008;Konishi et al, 2007;Shekhar et al, 2010;Feuerstein et al, 2008;Konishi et al, 2007;Feuerstein et al, 2007;Leven et al, 2005;Blackall et al, 2000)). In an alternative approach, reconstructed surface data may be used to perform the registration with pre-operative models (Audette et al, 2000). Comprehensive reviews on shape matching in general have been published by the computer vision community (cf.…”
Section: Intra-operative Registration For Augmented Reality Guidancementioning
confidence: 99%