首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     


Fusion of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance mammography at 3.0T with X-ray mammograms: pilot study evaluation using dedicated semi-automatic registration software
Authors:Dietzel Matthias  Hopp Torsten  Ruiter Nicole  Zoubi Ramy  Runnebaum Ingo B  Kaiser Werner A  Baltzer Pascal A T
Affiliation:a Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Erlanger Allee 101, D-07740 Jena, Germany
b Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Institute for Data Processing and Electronics, Postfach 3640, D-76021 Karlsruhe, Germany
c Medical School; University of Harvard, 25 Shattuck Street, Boston, MA 02115, USA
d Clinic of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Bachstraße 18, D-07743 Jena, Germany
Abstract:

Rationale and objectives

To evaluate the semi-automatic image registration accuracy of X-ray-mammography (XR-M) with high-resolution high-field (3.0 T) MR-mammography (MR-M) in an initial pilot study.

Material and methods

MR-M was acquired on a high-field clinical scanner at 3.0 T (T1-weighted 3D VIBE ± Gd). XR-M was obtained with state-of-the-art full-field digital systems. Seven patients with clearly delineable mass lesions >10 mm both in XR-M and MR-M were enrolled (exclusion criteria: previous breast surgery; surgical intervention between XR-M and MR-M).XR-M and MR-M were matched using a dedicated image-registration algorithm allowing semi-automatic non-linear deformation of MR-M based on finite-element modeling. To identify registration errors (RE) a virtual craniocaudal 2D mammogram was calculated by the software from MR-M (with and w/o Gadodiamide/Gd) and matched with corresponding XR-M. To quantify REs the geometric center of the lesions in the virtual vs. conventional mammogram were subtracted. The robustness of registration was quantified by registration of X-MRs to both MR-Ms with and w/o Gadodiamide.

Results

Image registration was performed successfully for all patients. Overall RE was 8.2 mm (1 min after Gd; confidence interval/CI: 2.0-14.4 mm, standard deviation/SD: 6.7 mm) vs. 8.9 mm (no Gd; CI: 4.0-13.9 mm, SD: 5.4 mm). The mean difference between pre- vs. post-contrast was 0.7 mm (SD: 1.9 mm).

Conclusion

Image registration of high-field 3.0 T MR-mammography with X-ray-mammography is feasible. For this study applying a high-resolution protocol at 3.0 T, the registration was robust and the overall registration error was sufficient for clinical application.
Keywords:Mammography   Magnetic resonance imaging   Breast neoplasms   Radiographic image interpretation   Computer-assisted   Image interpretation   Computer-assisted   Imaging   Three-dimensional   Humans   Female   Contrast media   Gadolinium DTPA
本文献已被 ScienceDirect PubMed 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号