Evaluation of an intensity-based algorithm for 2D/3D registration of natural knee videofluoroscopy data

• Published in: Medical engineering & physics Vol. 77; pp. 107 - 113
• Main Authors: Postolka, Barbara, List, Renate, Thelen, Benedikt, Schütz, Pascal, Taylor, William R., Zheng, Guoyan
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England Elsevier Ltd 01.03.2020
• Subjects: 2D/3D registration; Algorithms; Fluoroscopy; Humans; Imaging, Three-Dimensional - methods; in-vivo kinematics; Knee; Knee - diagnostic imaging; Software; Videofluoroscopy; Knee; in-vivo kinematics; Videofluoroscopy; 2D/3D registration
• ISSN: 1350-4533; 1873-4030; 1873-4030
• DOI: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2020.01.002

•New algorithm was able to register with an accuracy of <1 mm (in-plane) and <2°.•The algorithm could not register all images successfully.•Semi-automatic or manual registration is still required to obtain good results. The accurate quantification of in-vivo tibio-femoral kinematics is essential for understanding joint functionality, but determination of the 3D pose of bones from 2D single-plane fluoroscopic images remains challenging. We aimed to evaluate the accuracy, reliability and repeatability of an intensity-based 2D/3D registration algorithm. The accuracy was evaluated using fluoroscopic images of 2 radiopaque bones in 18 different poses, compared against a gold-standard fiducial calibration device. In addition, 3 natural femora and 3 natural tibiae were used to examine registration reliability and repeatability. Both manual fitting and intensity-based registration exhibited a mean absolute error of <1 mm in-plane. Overall, intensity-based registration of the femoral bone model revealed significantly higher translational and rotational errors than manual fitting, while no statistical differences (except for y-axis translation) were found for the tibial bone model. The repeatability of 108 intensity-based registrations showed mean in-plane standard deviations of 0.23–0.56 mm, but out-of-plane position repeatability was lower (mean SD: femur 7.98 mm, tibia 6.96 mm). SDs for rotations averaged 0.77–2.52°. While the algorithm registered some images extremely well, other images clearly required manual intervention. When the algorithm registered the bones repeatably, it was also accurate, suggesting an approach that includes manual intervention could become practical for efficient and accurate registration.