2004
DOI: 10.1120/jacmp.2021.25277
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Clinical validation of the normalized mutual information method for registration of CT and MR images in radiotherapy of brain tumors

Abstract: Image registration integrates information from different imaging modalities and has the potential to improve determination of target volume in radiotherapy planning. This paper describes the implementation and validation of a 3D fully automated registration procedure in the process of radiotherapy treatment planning of brain tumors. Fifteen patients with various brain tumors received computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR) brain imaging before the start of radiotherapy. First, the normalized mutua… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
20
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Registration of the images was confirmed visually. The reported registration error for NMI is less than 1 mm [13]. After image registration was completed, all image sets, including the standard anatomical MR images and PET data, were converted into 256 9 256 9 256 isotropic, 1 9 1 9 1 mm images enabling further voxel-wise analysis of the images (Fig.…”
Section: Image Fusion and Registrationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Registration of the images was confirmed visually. The reported registration error for NMI is less than 1 mm [13]. After image registration was completed, all image sets, including the standard anatomical MR images and PET data, were converted into 256 9 256 9 256 isotropic, 1 9 1 9 1 mm images enabling further voxel-wise analysis of the images (Fig.…”
Section: Image Fusion and Registrationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The reported registration error of NMI is <1 mm. 21 After image registration was completed, all For stereotactic measurement, mean signal intensity was computed within the ROI with 3 Â 3 voxels in axial images located at the biopsy site (Fig. 1).…”
Section: Patientsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is also important that patients are positioned the same way in MRI as they are for CT. Changes in patient position in MRI can lead to misalignments when registering with CT. The difference in the shape of the MRI table from the CT table is one reason for the misalignment in registration. There have been a number of studies published investigating rigid registration accuracy [17][18][19][20]. Moore et al [17] assessed the registration accuracy of their treatment planning system by outlining structures on a registered phantom.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Using the position, area and perimeter of each structure and with a coefficient of agreement analysis, the accuracy of the image registration algorithm was determined. Another group [18] used anatomical landmarks to determine the registration accuracy of CT and MRI data sets.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%