Evaluation of various Deformable Image Registrations for Point and Volume Variations

TL;DR

This study compares the accuracy of various deformable image registration algorithms in handling point and volume deformations, highlighting their performance differences and the importance of application-specific verification.

Contribution

It provides a systematic evaluation of multiple DIR algorithms' accuracy in point and volume deformations using standardized metrics and software.

Findings

All algorithms maintained high similarity metrics at 4mm deformation.

Volume changes within 12% were accurately registered within 5%.

Most algorithms achieved DSC above 0.95, except MD in certain cases.

Abstract

The accuracy of deformable image registration (DIR) has a significant dosimetric impact in radiation treatment planning. We evaluated accuracy of various DIR algorithms using variations of the deformation point and volume. The reference image (Iref) and volume (Vref) was first generated with virtual deformation QA software (ImSimQA, Oncology System Limited, UK). We deformed Iref with axial movement of deformation point and Vref depending on the types of deformation that are the deformation1 is to increase the Vref (relaxation) and the deformation 2 is to decrease . The deformed image (Idef) and volume (Vdef) acquired by ImSimQA software were inversely deformed to Iref and Vref using DIR algorithms. As a result, we acquired deformed image (Iid) from Idef and volume (Vid) from Vdef. The DIR algorithms were the Horn Schunk optical flow (HS), Iterative Optical Flow (IOF), Modified Demons (MD) and Fast Demons (FD) with the Deformable Image Registration and Adaptive Radiotherapy Toolkit (DIRART) of MATLAB. The image similarity between Iref and Iid was calculated using the metrics that were Normalized Mutual Information (NMI) and Normalized Cross Correlation (NCC). When moving distance of deformation point was 4 mm, the value of NMI was above 1.81 and NCC was above 0.99 in all DIR algorithms.When the Vref increased or decreased about 12%, the difference between Vref and Vid was within 5% regardless of the type of deformation.The value of Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC) was above 0.95 in deformation1 except for the MD algorithm. In case of deformation 2, that of DSC was above 0.95 in all DIR algorithms. The Idef and Vdef have not been completely restored to Iref and Vref and the accuracy of DIR algorithms was different depending on the degree of deformation. Hence, the performance of DIR algorithms should be verified for the desired applications.