close
Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in
Menu
Find a journal Publish with us Track your research
Search
Saved research
Cart
  1. Home
  2. Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention — MICCAI 2002
  3. Conference paper

Validation of Volume-Preserving Non-rigid Registration: Application to Contrast-Enhanced MR-Mammography

  • Conference paper
  • First Online: 10 October 2002
  • pp 307–314
  • Cite this conference paper
Save conference paper
View saved research
Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention — MICCAI 2002 (MICCAI 2002)
Validation of Volume-Preserving Non-rigid Registration: Application to Contrast-Enhanced MR-Mammography
  • C. Tanner6,
  • J. A. Schnabel,
  • A. Degenhard7,
  • A. D. Castellano-Smith6,
  • C. Hayes7,
  • M. O. Leach7,
  • D. R. Hose8,
  • D. L. G. Hill6 &
  • …
  • D. J. Hawkes6 

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 2488))

Included in the following conference series:

  • International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention
  • 3323 Accesses

  • 27 Citations

  • 3 Altmetric

Abstract

In this paper, we present a validation study for volume preserving non-rigid registration of 3D contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance mammograms. This study allows for the first time to assess the effectiveness of a volume preserving constraint to improve registration accuracy in this context. The validation is based on the simulation of physically plausible breast deformations with biomechanical breast models (BBMs) employing finite element methods. We constructed BBMs for four patients with four different deformation scenarios each. These deformations were applied to the post-contrast image to simulate patient motion occurring between pre- and post-contrast image acquisition. The original pre-contrast images were registered to the corresponding BBM-deformed post-contrast images. We assessed the accuracy of two optimisation schemes of a non-rigid registration algorithm. The first solely aims to improve the similarity of the images while the second includes the minimisation of volume changes as another objective. We observed reductions in residual registration error at every resolution when constraining the registration to preserve volume. Within the contrast enhancing lesion, the best results were obtained with a control point spacing of 20mm, resulting in target registration errors below 0.5mm on average. This study forms an important milestone in making the non-rigid registration framework applicable for clinical routine use.

Download to read the full chapter text

Chapter PDF

Similar content being viewed by others

Deformable Registration for Longitudinal Breast MRI Screening

Article 13 April 2018

Model-based rigid and nonrigid volumetric image registration for image-guided interventions

Article Open access 28 April 2026

The Effect of Registration on Voxel-Wise Tofts Model Parameters and Uncertainties from DCE-MRI of Early-Stage Breast Cancer Patients Using 3DSlicer

Article 03 August 2020

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, books and news in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.
  • Cancer Imaging
  • Functional magnetic resonance imaging
  • Magnetic Resonance Imaging
  • Medical Imaging
  • Nomograms
  • 3-D Image Reconstruction
  • Medical Image Registration Techniques

References

  1. C. H. Blood and B. R. Zetter, “Tumor Interactions with the Vasculature: Angiogensis and Tumor Metastasis,” Biochimica et Biophysica Acta, vol. 1032, pp. 89–118, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  2. P. W. Vaupel, Blood Flow, Oxygenation, Tissue pH Distribution, and Bioenergetic Status of Tumors. Berlin, Germany: Ernst Schering Research Foundation, 1st ed., 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  3. M. D. Schnall and D. M. Ikeda, “Lesion Diagnosis Working Group Report,” Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, vol. 10, pp. 982–990, 1999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. D. Rueckert, L. I. Sonoda, C. Hayes, D. L. Hill, M. O. Leach, and D. J. Hawkes, “Non-rigid Registration using Free-Form Deformations: Application to Breast MR Images,” IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, vol. 7, pp. 1–10, August 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  5. E. R. E. Denton, L. I. Sonoda, D. Rueckert, S. C. Rankin, C. Hayes, M. O. Leach, and D. J. Hawkes, “Comparison and Evaluation of Rigid, Affine, and Nonrigid Registration of Breast MR Images,” Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography, vol. 5, pp. 800–805, May 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  6. C. Tanner, J. A. Schnabel, D. Chung, M. J. Clarkson, D. Rueckert, D. L. G. Hill, and D. J. Hawkes, “Volume and Shape Preservation of Enhancing Lesions when Applying Non-rigid Registration to a Time Series of Contrast Enhanced MR Breast Images,” in Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention, Pittsburgh, USA, pp. 327–337, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  7. D. Terzopoulos and K. Waters, “Analysis and Synthesis of Facial Image Sequences using Physical and Anatomical Models,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 15, pp. 569–579, 1993.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. P. J. Edwards, D. L. G. Hill, J. A. Little, and D. J. Hawkes, “A Three-Component Deformation Model for Image-Guided Surgery,” Medical Image Analysis, vol. 2, pp. 355–367, 1998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. T. Rohlfing and C. R. Maurer, “Intensity-Based Non-rigid Registration Using Adaptive Multilevel Free-Form Deformation with an Incompressibility Constraint,” in Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention, Utrecht, Netherlands, pp. 111–119, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  10. J. A. Schnabel, C. Tanner, A. D. Castellano-Smith, M. O. Leach, C. Hayes, A. Degenhard, R. Hose, D. L. G. Hill, and D. J. Hawkes, “Validation of Non-Rigid Registration using Finite Element Methods,” in Information Processing in Medical Imaging, Davis, CA, USA, pp. 344–357, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  11. J. A. Schnabel, D. Rueckert, M. Quist, J. M. Blackall, A. Castellano-Smith, T. Hartkens, G. P. Penney, W. A. Hall, C. L. Truwit, F A. Gerritsen, D. L. G. Hill, and D. J. Hawkes, “A Generic Framework for Non-Rigid Registration based on Non-Uniform Multi-Level Free-Form Deformations,” in Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention, Utrecht, Netherlands, pp. 573–581, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  12. J. A. Schnabel, C. Tanner, A. D. Castellano-Smith, A. Degenhard, C. Hayes, M. O. Leach, D. R. Hose, and D. J. H. D. L. G. Hill, “Finite element based validation of non-rigid registration using single-and multi-level free-form deformations: Application to contrast-enhanced MR mammography,” in Proceedings SPIE Medical Imaging 2002, Image Processing, San Diego, CA, pp. 550–581, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  13. W. Schroeder, K. Martin, and B. Lorensen, The Visualization Toolkit. New Jersey, USA: Prentice Hall PTR, 2nd ed., 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  14. ANSYS. http://www.ansys.com.

  15. A. Sarvazyan, D. Goukassian, E. Maevsky, and G. Oranskaja, “Elastic Imaging as a new Modality of Medical Imaging for Cancer Detection,” in Proceedings of the International Workshop on Interaction of Ultrasound with Biological Media, Valenciennes, France, pp. 69–81, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  16. T. A. Krouskop, T. M. Wheeler, F. Kallel, B. S. Garra, and T. Hall, “Elastic Moduli of Breast and Prostate Tissues Under Compression,” Ultrasonic Imaging, vol. 20, pp. 260–274, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  17. C. Tanner, A. Degenhard, J. A. Schnabel, A. Castellano-Smith, C. Hayes, L. I. Sonoda, M. O. Leach, D. R. Hose, D. L. G. Hill, and D. J. Hawkes, “A Comparison of Biomechanical Breast Models: A Case Study,” in Proceedings SPIE Medical Imaging 2002, Image Processing, San Diego, CA, pp. 1807–1818, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  18. J. M. Fitzpatrick, “Detecting failure, assessing success,” in D. L. G. Hill and D. J. Hawkes, eds., Medical Image Registration. CRC Press, 2001. Hajnal et al. [19], ch. I-6, pp. 117–139.

    Google Scholar 

  19. J. V. Hajnal, D. L. G. Hill and D. J. Hawkes, eds., Medical Image Registration. CRC Press, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Div. of Radiological Sciences & Medical Engineering, King’s College London, UK

    C. Tanner, A. D. Castellano-Smith, D. L. G. Hill & D. J. Hawkes

  2. Section of MR, Inst. of Cancer Research & Royal Marsden NHS Trust, Sutton, UK

    A. Degenhard, C. Hayes & M. O. Leach

  3. Dept. of Medical Physics and Clinical Engineering, University of Sheffield, UK

    D. R. Hose

Authors
  1. C. Tanner
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. A. Schnabel
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. Degenhard
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. A. D. Castellano-Smith
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. C. Hayes
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  6. M. O. Leach
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  7. D. R. Hose
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  8. D. L. G. Hill
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  9. D. J. Hawkes
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechano-informatics Graduate School of Information Science and Technology, University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo Bunkyo-ku, 113-8656, Tokyo, Japan

    Takeyoshi Dohi

  2. Department of Radiology, Brigham andWomen’s Hospital, 75 Francis St., MA, 02115, Boston, USA

    Ron Kikinis

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2002 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Tanner, C. et al. (2002). Validation of Volume-Preserving Non-rigid Registration: Application to Contrast-Enhanced MR-Mammography. In: Dohi, T., Kikinis, R. (eds) Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention — MICCAI 2002. MICCAI 2002. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2488. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45786-0_38

Download citation

  • .RIS
  • .ENW
  • .BIB
  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45786-0_38

  • Published: 10 October 2002

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-44224-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45786-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Share this paper

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Keywords

  • Enhance Lesion
  • Volume Preserve
  • Target Registration Error
  • Rigid Registration
  • Voxel Position

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Profiles

  1. D. L. G. Hill View author profile

Search

Navigation

  • Find a journal
  • Publish with us
  • Track your research

Footer Navigation

Discover content

  • Journals A-Z
  • Books A-Z
  • Subjects A-Z

Publish with us

  • Journal finder
  • Publish your research
  • Language editing
  • Open access publishing

Products and services

  • Our products
  • Librarians
  • Societies
  • Partners and advertisers

Our brands

  • Springer
  • Nature Portfolio
  • BMC
  • Palgrave Macmillan
  • Apress
  • Discover

Corporate Navigation

  • Your US state privacy rights
  • Accessibility statement
  • Terms and conditions
  • Privacy policy
  • Help and support
  • Legal notice
  • Cancel contracts here

104.23.243.58

Not affiliated

Springer Nature

© 2026 Springer Nature