PET, CT, and MR image registration of the rat brain and skull

e-Archivo Repository

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Vaquero López, Juan José
dc.contributor.author Desco Menéndez, Manuel
dc.contributor.author Pascau González-Garzón, Javier
dc.contributor.author Santos, Andrés
dc.contributor.author Lee, Injae
dc.contributor.author Seidel, J.
dc.contributor.author Green, M. V.
dc.date.accessioned 2010-10-04T11:52:09Z
dc.date.available 2010-10-04T11:52:09Z
dc.date.issued 2001-08
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitation IEEE Nuclear and Plasma Sciences Society, 2001, vol. 48, n. 4, p. 1440-1445
dc.identifier.issn 0018-9499
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10016/9342
dc.description.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
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf
dc.language.iso eng
dc.publisher IEEE
dc.rights © IEEE
dc.subject.other Image reconstruction
dc.subject.other Positron Emission Tomography (PET)
dc.subject.other Small animal imaging
dc.title PET, CT, and MR image registration of the rat brain and skull
dc.type article
dc.type.review PeerReviewed
dc.description.status Publicado
dc.relation.publisherversion http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1109/23.958376
dc.subject.eciencia Biología y Biomedicina
dc.identifier.doi 10.1109/23.958376
dc.rights.accessRights openAccess
dc.identifier.publicationfirstpage 1440
dc.identifier.publicationissue 4
dc.identifier.publicationlastpage 1445
dc.identifier.publicationtitle IEEE Nuclear and Plasma Sciences Society
dc.identifier.publicationvolume 48
 Find Full text

Files in this item

*Click on file's image for preview. (Embargoed files's preview is not supported)


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record