• Raj Shekhar, Vivek Walimbe, Shanker Raja, Vladimir Zagrodsky, Mangesh Kanvinde, Guiyun Wu, and Bohdan Bybel.
• Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA. rshekhar@umm.edu
• J. Nucl. Med. 2005 Sep 1; 46 (9): 1488-96.

UnlabelledRegistration and fusion of whole-body functional PET and anatomic CT is significant for accurate differentiation of viable tumors from benign masses, radiotherapy planning and monitoring treatment response, and cancer staging. Whole-body PET and CT acquired on separate scanners are misregistered because of differences in patient positions and orientations, couch shapes, and breathing protocols. Although a combined PET/CT scanner removes many of these misalignments, breathing-related nonrigid mismatches still persist.MethodsWe have developed a new, fully automated normalized mutual information-based 3-dimensional elastic image registration technique that can accurately align whole-body PET and CT images acquired on stand-alone scanners as well as a combined PET/CT scanner. The algorithm morphs the PET image to align spatially with the CT image by generating an elastic transformation field by interpolating quaternions and translations from multiple 6-parameter rigid-body registrations, each obtained for hierarchically subdivided image subvolumes. Fifteen whole-body (spanning thorax and abdomen) PET/CT image pairs acquired separately and 5 image pairs acquired on a combined scanner were registered. The cases were selected on the basis of the availability of both CT and PET images, without any other screening criteria, such as a specific clinical condition or prognosis. A rigorous quantitative validation was performed by evaluating algorithm performance in the context of variability among 3 clinical experts in the identification of up to 32 homologous anatomic landmarks.ResultsThe average execution time was 75 and 45 min for images acquired using separate scanners and combined scanner, respectively. Visual inspection indicated improved matching of homologous structures in all cases. The mean registration accuracy (5.5 and 5.9 mm for images from separate scanners and combined scanner, respectively) was found comparable to the mean interexpert difference in landmark identification (5.6 +/- 2.4 and 6.6 +/- 3.4 mm, respectively). The variability in landmark identification did not show statistically significant changes on replacing any expert by the algorithm.ConclusionWe have presented a new and automated elastic registration algorithm to correct for nonrigid misalignments in whole-body PET/CT images as well as improve the "mechanical" registration of a combined PET/CT scanner. The algorithm performance was on par with the average opinion of 3 experts.

27 keywords...

hide…