2000
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-40899-4_55
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Nonrigid Registration of 3D Scalar, Vector and Tensor Medical Data

Abstract: Abstract. New medical imaging modalities offering multi-valued data, such as phase contrast MRA and diffusion tensor MRI, require general representations for the development of automatized algorithms. In this paper we propose a unified framework for the registration of medical volumetric multi-valued data. The paper extends the usual concept of similarity in intensity (scalar) data to vector and tensor cases. A discussion on appropriate template selection and on the limitations of the template matching approac… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
21
0

Year Published

2002
2002
2007
2007

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
21
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Our group has proposed diffusion tensor registration methods using tensor similarity (Ruiz-Alzola et al, 2000, 2002 and multiple channel information (Guimond et al, 2002). Ruiz-Alzola and colleagues (Ruiz-Alzola et al, 2000, 2002 extended the general concept of intensity-based similarity in registration to the tensor case and also proposed an interpolation method by means of the Kriging estimator. Their work is based on template matching by locally optimized similarity function.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our group has proposed diffusion tensor registration methods using tensor similarity (Ruiz-Alzola et al, 2000, 2002 and multiple channel information (Guimond et al, 2002). Ruiz-Alzola and colleagues (Ruiz-Alzola et al, 2000, 2002 extended the general concept of intensity-based similarity in registration to the tensor case and also proposed an interpolation method by means of the Kriging estimator. Their work is based on template matching by locally optimized similarity function.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…h Our space includes a set of 3-D curves and a number of cluster centers. From each center, μ k , we construct an Euclidean distance map: (2) and the nearest-neighbor transform, ℒ k : (3) where d(x, μ kj ) is the Euclidean distance from the point x in the space to the jth point on the kth center. Each element of ℒ k will thus contain the linear index of the nearest point of the center μ k .…”
Section: Similarity Measurementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such methods are sensitive to the accuracy of specifying the ROIs and are prone to user errors. Others have performed a voxel-based analysis of a registered DTI dataset, which requires non-linear warping of the tensor field [2], which in turn needs re-orientation of the tensors [3,4].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, using many degrees of freedom in the spatial transformation of tensor maps could diminish the real differences in tensor morphology across groups. DTI datasets, however, can be normalized accurately using any one of several excellent existing methods (Ashburner and Friston, 1999;Alexander et al, 2001;Ruiz-Alzola et al, 2000Xu et al, 2003) (Netsch and Muiswinkel, 2003;Park et al, 2003;Westin and Knutsson, 2003;Wang et al, 2004) (Bansal et al, 2005b), thereby avoiding this inappropriate elimination of real group differences. We should note that although the accurate spatial normalization of DTI datasets is essential for the valid comparison of tensor morphologies across groups, our method for the statistical comparison of tensor morphologies is independent of the method used to normalize DT images.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%