Español English Contacte con nosotros http://www.uc3m.es/portal/page/portal/biblioteca
DSpace e-Archivo

Archivo Abierto Institucional de la Universidad Carlos III de Madrid > Investigación > Departamentos > Departamento de Bioingeniería e Ingeniería Aeroespacial: Bioingeniería > DBIAB - Journal Articles >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10016/9342

Files in This Item:
vaquero_pet_TNS_2001.pdf111,52 kBAdobe PDFformato pdf
Title: PET, CT, and MR image registration of the rat brain and skull
Author(s): Vaquero, Juan José
Desco, Manuel
Pascau, Javier
Santos, Andrés
Lee, Injae
Seidel, J.
Green, M. V.
Publisher: IEEE
Issued date: Aug-2001
Citation: IEEE Nuclear and Plasma Sciences Society, 2001, vol. 48, n. 4, p. 1440-1445
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10016/9342
ISSN: 0018-9499
DOI: 10.1109/23.958376
Abstract: Spatially registered positron emission tomography (PET), computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance (MR) images of the same small animal offer potential advantages over PET alone: CT images should allow accurate, nearly noise-free correction of the PET image data for attenuation; the CT or MR images should permit more certain identification of structures evident in the PET images; and CT images provide a priori anatomical information that may be of use with resolution-improving image-reconstruction algorithms that model the PET imaging process. However, image registration algorithms effective in human studies have not been characterized in the small-animal setting. Accordingly, the authors evaluated the ability of the automated image registration (AIR) and mutual information (MI) algorithms to register PET images of the rat skull and brain to CT or MR images of the same animal. External fiducial marks visible in all three modalities were used to estimate residual errors after registration. The AIR algorithm registered PET bone-to-CT bone images with a maximum error of less than 1.0 mm, The registration errors for PET brain-to-CT brain images, however, were greater, and considerable user intervention was required prior to registration. The AIR algorithm either failed or required excessive user intervention to register PET and MR brain images. In contrast, the MI algorithm yielded smaller registration errors in all scenarios with little user intervention. The MI algorithm thus appears to be a more robust method for registering PET, CT, and MR images of the rat head
Review: PeerReviewed
Publisher version: http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1109/23.958376
Keywords: Image reconstruction
Positron Emission Tomography (PET)
Small animal imaging
Rights: © IEEE
Appears in Collections:DBIAB - Journal Articles

Refworks Export

SFX Query

Items in E-Archivo are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

 

Valid XHTML 1.0! © Universidad Carlos III de Madrid - Software DSpace - Terms of use - Feedback