MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2732397834 · doi:10.1002/mp.12441

Real‐time registration of 3D to 2D ultrasound images for image‐guided prostate biopsy

2017· article· en· W2732397834 on OpenAlex
Derek J. Gillies, Lori Gardi, Tharindu De Silva, Shuang-Ren Zhao, Aaron Fenster

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoft Robotics and Applications
Canadian institutionsCentre for Imaging Technology CommercializationWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceFiducial markerImage registrationMotion compensationProstate biopsyArtificial intelligenceComputer visionImaging phantomMatch movingMedicineProstateRadiologyMotion (physics)CancerImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: During image-guided prostate biopsy, needles are targeted at tissues that are suspicious of cancer to obtain specimen for histological examination. Unfortunately, patient motion causes targeting errors when using an MR-transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) fusion approach to augment the conventional biopsy procedure. This study aims to develop an automatic motion correction algorithm approaching the frame rate of an ultrasound system to be used in fusion-based prostate biopsy systems. Two modes of operation have been investigated for the clinical implementation of the algorithm: motion compensation using a single user initiated correction performed prior to biopsy, and real-time continuous motion compensation performed automatically as a background process. METHODS: Retrospective 2D and 3D TRUS patient images acquired prior to biopsy gun firing were registered using an intensity-based algorithm utilizing normalized cross-correlation and Powell's method for optimization. 2D and 3D images were downsampled and cropped to estimate the optimal amount of image information that would perform registrations quickly and accurately. The optimal search order during optimization was also analyzed to avoid local optima in the search space. Error in the algorithm was computed using target registration errors (TREs) from manually identified homologous fiducials in a clinical patient dataset. The algorithm was evaluated for real-time performance using the two different modes of clinical implementations by way of user initiated and continuous motion compensation methods on a tissue mimicking prostate phantom. RESULTS: After implementation in a TRUS-guided system with an image downsampling factor of 4, the proposed approach resulted in a mean ± std TRE and computation time of 1.6 ± 0.6 mm and 57 ± 20 ms respectively. The user initiated mode performed registrations with in-plane, out-of-plane, and roll motions computation times of 108 ± 38 ms, 60 ± 23 ms, and 89 ± 27 ms, respectively, and corresponding registration errors of 0.4 ± 0.3 mm, 0.2 ± 0.4 mm, and 0.8 ± 0.5°. The continuous method performed registration significantly faster (P < 0.05) than the user initiated method, with observed computation times of 35 ± 8 ms, 43 ± 16 ms, and 27 ± 5 ms for in-plane, out-of-plane, and roll motions, respectively, and corresponding registration errors of 0.2 ± 0.3 mm, 0.7 ± 0.4 mm, and 0.8 ± 1.0°. CONCLUSIONS: The presented method encourages real-time implementation of motion compensation algorithms in prostate biopsy with clinically acceptable registration errors. Continuous motion compensation demonstrated registration accuracy with submillimeter and subdegree error, while performing < 50 ms computation times. Image registration technique approaching the frame rate of an ultrasound system offers a key advantage to be smoothly integrated to the clinical workflow. In addition, this technique could be used further for a variety of image-guided interventional procedures to treat and diagnose patients by improving targeting accuracy.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.692
Threshold uncertainty score0.321

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.273 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it