Difference between revisions of "2008 IGT Project Week Nonrigid MR-ULS Registration Algorithms for Neurosurgery, Prostate MRgFUS and Brachytherapy"

From NAMIC Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
 
(8 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
  Back to [[2008_IGT_Project_Week#Projects]]
 
  Back to [[2008_IGT_Project_Week#Projects]]
 +
Team: Sandy Wells, Tina Kapur, Matt Toews, Ben Schwartz, Steve Haker, Michel Audette, Andinet E, Ziv Yanivm Jay, John Onofrey, Raul San Jose
  
−
Team:Sandy Wells, Michel, Tina Kapur, Matt Toews, Nathan McDannold, Ben Schwartz
+
[[Media:2008_IGT_Project_Week_Registration.ppt|Powerpoint Presentation]]
  
−
Goals: To continue the discussions from the IGT Non-rigid registration breakout
+
Goals:
−
**To discuss the clinical requirements (accuracy, speed, workflow) of these three problems
+
A round table discussion of issues relating to multimodal (MR/CT-US) registration for image-guided therapy.  This will include:
−
**To discuss the various approaches underway within our group
+
#Definition of relevant research issues
−
**Is there a commercial solution that we should bootstrap from?
+
#Visual Inspection of data sets brought by participants
−
**Each group to bring a data set for visual inspection by the rest
+
#Discussion of clinical requirements for the three focus applications: Neurosurgery, Prostate MRgFUS, and Prostate Brachytherapy, Image Guided Endoscopy/Laproscropy
 +
#Where available, identification of particular algorithms for each of the focus applicatons
  
−
Approach:
+
Non-exhaustive List of Issues for Discussion
−
This is a discussion group.
+
#Goals of Non-Rigid MR-US Registration?
−
 
+
#*Use coarse, cost-effective inter-operative US imagery to update detailed preoperative MR imager, to enhance visualization during therapy.
−
Results (to be completed and presented at the end of the week):
+
#Requirements
 +
#*Clinical requirements: registration precision?
 +
#*Is MR-US registration necessary?
 +
#State-of-the-art
 +
#*Existing systems?
 +
#*Real-time?
 +
#*Accuracy?
 +
#Image Registration
 +
#*MR-US similarity measurement: mutual information, correlation ratio?
 +
#*Transforms: rigid, deformable? Outlier detection?
 +
#*3DMR-2DUS slices? 3DMR-3DUS? 3DMR-3DUS reconstuction?
 +
#*Initialialization: 3D tracking of US probe?
 +
#*Freehand US?
 +
#*Robust?
 +
#Updating Pre-operative Imagery
 +
#*What information is required? Rigid/non-rigid deformation? Resolution?
 +
#*Interpolation?
 +
#Challenges
 +
#*Poor US image quality, occlusion, resection, poor visibility of anatomy
 +
#*Computational complexity
 +
#Data
 +
#*Phantom data?
 +
#*Data sharing for benchmarking?
 +
#Approach-based path planning
 +
#*Neurosurgical guidance can/should integrate knowledge of surgical approach: frontal, occipital, pterional, transnasal...
 +
#* Use knowledge of _specific_ critical tissues & likely eloquent areas in path planning
 +
#* Curvilinear neurosurgical path planning.

Latest revision as of 15:11, 9 December 2008

Home < 2008 IGT Project Week Nonrigid MR-ULS Registration Algorithms for Neurosurgery, Prostate MRgFUS and Brachytherapy
Back to 2008_IGT_Project_Week#Projects

Team: Sandy Wells, Tina Kapur, Matt Toews, Ben Schwartz, Steve Haker, Michel Audette, Andinet E, Ziv Yanivm Jay, John Onofrey, Raul San Jose

Powerpoint Presentation

Goals: A round table discussion of issues relating to multimodal (MR/CT-US) registration for image-guided therapy. This will include:

  1. Definition of relevant research issues
  2. Visual Inspection of data sets brought by participants
  3. Discussion of clinical requirements for the three focus applications: Neurosurgery, Prostate MRgFUS, and Prostate Brachytherapy, Image Guided Endoscopy/Laproscropy
  4. Where available, identification of particular algorithms for each of the focus applicatons

Non-exhaustive List of Issues for Discussion

  1. Goals of Non-Rigid MR-US Registration?
    • Use coarse, cost-effective inter-operative US imagery to update detailed preoperative MR imager, to enhance visualization during therapy.
  2. Requirements
    • Clinical requirements: registration precision?
    • Is MR-US registration necessary?
  3. State-of-the-art
    • Existing systems?
    • Real-time?
    • Accuracy?
  4. Image Registration
    • MR-US similarity measurement: mutual information, correlation ratio?
    • Transforms: rigid, deformable? Outlier detection?
    • 3DMR-2DUS slices? 3DMR-3DUS? 3DMR-3DUS reconstuction?
    • Initialialization: 3D tracking of US probe?
    • Freehand US?
    • Robust?
  5. Updating Pre-operative Imagery
    • What information is required? Rigid/non-rigid deformation? Resolution?
    • Interpolation?
  6. Challenges
    • Poor US image quality, occlusion, resection, poor visibility of anatomy
    • Computational complexity
  7. Data
    • Phantom data?
    • Data sharing for benchmarking?
  8. Approach-based path planning
    • Neurosurgical guidance can/should integrate knowledge of surgical approach: frontal, occipital, pterional, transnasal...
    • Use knowledge of _specific_ critical tissues & likely eloquent areas in path planning
    • Curvilinear neurosurgical path planning.
Retrieved from "https://www.na-mic.org/w/index.php?title=2008_IGT_Project_Week_Nonrigid_MR-ULS_Registration_Algorithms_for_Neurosurgery,_Prostate_MRgFUS_and_Brachytherapy&oldid=32976"