Fully Automated Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion via a Probabilistic Registration Metric

被引:10
|
作者
Sparks, Rachel [1 ,2 ]
Bloch, B. Nicolas [3 ]
Feleppa, Ernest [4 ]
Barratt, Dean [5 ]
Madabhushi, Anant [2 ]
机构
[1] Rutgers State Univ, Dept Biomed Engn, Piscataway, NJ 08855 USA
[2] Case Western Reserve Univ, Dept Biomed Engn, Cleveland, OH 44106 USA
[3] Boston Univ, Boston Med Ctr, Dept Radiol, Boston, MA 02215 USA
[4] Lizzi Ctr Biomed Engn, Riverside Res, New York, NY 10001 USA
[5] UCL, Ctr Med Image Comp, London, England
来源
MEDICAL IMAGING 2013: IMAGE-GUIDED PROCEDURES, ROBOTIC INTERVENTIONS, AND MODELING | 2013年 / 8671卷
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
MRI/TRUS DATA FUSION; GUIDED BIOPSY; CANCER-DETECTION; IMAGES; MRI; SEGMENTATION; INHOMOGENEITY; BRACHYTHERAPY; SPECTROSCOPY; STATISTICS;
D O I
10.1117/12.2007610
中图分类号
R318 [生物医学工程];
学科分类号
0831 ;
摘要
In this work, we present a novel, automated, registration method to fuse magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) images of the prostate. Our methodology consists of: (1) delineating the prostate on MRI, (2) building a probabilistic model of prostate location on TRUS, and (3) aligning the MRI prostate segmentation to the TRUS probabilistic model. TRUS-guided needle biopsy is the current gold standard for prostate cancer (CaP) diagnosis. Up to 40% of CaP lesions appear isoechoic on TRUS, hence TRUS-guided biopsy cannot reliably target CaP lesions and is associated with a high false negative rate. MRI is better able to distinguish CaP from benign prostatic tissue, but requires special equipment and training. MRI-TRUS fusion, whereby MRI is acquired pre-operatively and aligned to TRUS during the biopsy procedure, allows for information from both modalities to be used to help guide the biopsy. The use of MRI and TRUS in combination to guide biopsy at least doubles the yield of positive biopsies. Previous work on MRI-TRUS fusion has involved aligning manually determined fiducials or prostate surfaces to achieve image registration. The accuracy of these methods is dependent on the reader's ability to determine fiducials or prostate surfaces with minimal error, which is a difficult and time-consuming task. Our novel, fully automated MRI-TRUS fusion method represents a significant advance over the current state-of-the-art because it does not require manual intervention after TRUS acquisition. All necessary preprocessing steps (i.e. delineation of the prostate on MRI) can be performed offline prior to the biopsy procedure. We evaluated our method on seven patient studies, with B-mode TRUS and a 1.5 T surface coil MRI. Our method has a root mean square error (RMSE) for expertly selected fiducials (consisting of the urethra, calcifications, and the centroids of CaP nodules) of 3.39 +/- 0.85 mm.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Accuracy of Endorectal Magnetic Resonance/Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion for Detection of Prostate Cancer During Brachytherapy
    Bubley, Glenn J.
    Bloch, B. N.
    Vazquez, Cesar
    Genega, Elizabeth
    Holupka, Ed
    Rofsky, Neil
    Kaplan, Irving
    UROLOGY, 2013, 81 (06) : 1284 - 1289
  • [22] The Role of Ipsilateral and Contralateral Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Systematic Prostate Biopsy in Men With Unilateral Magnetic Resonance Imaging Lesion Undergoing Magnetic Resonance Imaging-ultrasound Fusion-targeted Prostate Biopsy
    Bryk, Darren J.
    Llukani, Elton
    Taneja, Samir S.
    Rosenkrantz, Andrew B.
    Huang, William C.
    Lepor, Herbert
    UROLOGY, 2017, 102 : 178 - 182
  • [23] Comparative Analysis of Transperineal Template Saturation Prostate Biopsy Versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging Targeted Biopsy with Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Guidance
    Radtke, Jan P.
    Kuru, Timur H.
    Boxler, Silvan
    Alt, Celine D.
    Popeneciu, Ionel V.
    Huettenbrink, Clemens
    Klein, Tilman
    Steinemann, Sarah
    Bergstraesser, Claudia
    Roethke, Matthias
    Roth, Wilfried
    Schlemmer, Heinz-Peter
    Hohenfellner, Markus
    Hadaschik, Boris A.
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2015, 193 (01) : 87 - 94
  • [24] Transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsies vs. magnetic resonance imaging ultrasound fusion targeted biopsies: Who are the best candidates?
    Bey, Elsa
    Gaget, Olivier
    Descotes, Jean-Luc
    Franquet, Quentin
    Rambeaud, Jean-Jacques
    Long, Jean-Alexandre
    Fiard, Gaelle
    CUAJ-CANADIAN UROLOGICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL, 2018, 12 (01): : E10 - E14
  • [25] Manually controlled targeted prostate biopsy with real-time fusion imaging of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and transrectal ultrasound: An early experience
    Shoji, Sunao
    Hiraiwa, Shinichiro
    Endo, Jun
    Hashida, Kazunobu
    Tomonaga, Tetsuro
    Nakano, Mayura
    Sugiyama, Tomoko
    Tajiri, Takuma
    Terachi, Toshiro
    Uchida, Toyoaki
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2015, 22 (02) : 173 - 178
  • [26] Magnetic Resonance Imaging-guided In-bore and Magnetic Resonance Imaging-transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Targeted Prostate Biopsies: An Adjusted Comparison of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Detection Rate
    Costa, Daniel N.
    Goldberg, Kenneth
    de Leon, Alberto Diaz
    Lotan, Yair
    Xi, Yin
    Aziz, Muhammad
    Freifeld, Yuval
    Margulis, Vitaly
    Raj, Ganesh
    Roehrborn, Claus G.
    Hornberger, Brad
    Desai, Neil
    Bagrodia, Aditya
    Francis, Franto
    Pedrosa, Ivan
    Cadeddu, Jeffrey A.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY ONCOLOGY, 2019, 2 (04): : 397 - 404
  • [27] Confirmatory biopsy of men under active surveillance: extended versus saturation versus multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound fusion prostate biopsy
    Pepe, Pietro
    Cimino, Sebastiano
    Garufi, Antonio
    Priolo, Giandomenico
    Russo, Giorgio Ivan
    Giardina, Raimondo
    Reale, Giulio
    Pennisi, Michele
    Morgia, Giuseppe
    SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2017, 51 (04) : 260 - 263
  • [28] Prostate Cancer Diagnosis on Repeat Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy of Benign Lesions: Recommendations for Repeat Sampling
    Chelluri, Raju
    Kilchevsky, Amichai
    George, Arvin K.
    Sidana, Abhinav
    Frye, Thomas P.
    Su, Daniel
    Fascelli, Michele
    Ho, Richard
    Abboud, Steven F.
    Turkbey, Baris
    Merino, Maria J.
    Choyke, Peter L.
    Wood, Bradford J.
    Pinto, Peter A.
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2016, 196 (01) : 62 - 67
  • [29] Comparative Effectiveness of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Versus In-bore Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsy
    Ramos, Francisco
    Korets, Ruslan
    Fleishman, Aaron
    Kaul, Sumedh
    Johnson, Michael
    Wei, Jesse L.
    Olumi, Aria F.
    Tsai, Leo L.
    Gershman, Boris
    UROLOGY, 2023, 171 : 164 - 171
  • [30] A comparison of prostate tumor targeting strategies using magnetic resonance imaging-targeted, transrectal ultrasound-guided fusion biopsy
    Martin, Peter R.
    Cool, Derek W.
    Fenster, Aaron
    Ward, Aaron D.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2018, 45 (03) : 1018 - 1028