Open Access

Accuracy Evaluation for Region Centroid-Based Registration of Fluorescent CLSM Imagery

EURASIP Journal on Advances in Signal Processing20062006:082480

https://doi.org/10.1155/ASP/2006/82480

Received: 1 March 2005

Accepted: 16 November 2005

Published: 21 March 2006

Abstract

We present an accuracy evaluation of a semiautomatic registration technique for 3D volume reconstruction from fluorescent confocal laser scanning microscope (CLSM) imagery. The presented semiautomatic method is designed based on our observations that (a) an accurate point selection is much harder than an accurate region (segment) selection for a human, (b) a centroid selection of any region is less accurate by a human than by a computer, and (c) registration based on structural shape of a region rather than based on intensity-defined point is more robust to noise and to morphological deformation of features across stacks. We applied the method to image mosaicking and image alignment registration steps and evaluated its performance with 20 human subjects on CLSM images with stained blood vessels. Our experimental evaluation showed significant benefits of automation for 3D volume reconstruction in terms of achieved accuracy, consistency of results, and performance time. In addition, the results indicate that the differences between registration accuracy obtained by experts and by novices disappear with the proposed semiautomatic registration technique while the absolute registration accuracy increases.

[123456789101112131415161718192021]

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
The National Center for Supercomputing Applications, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
(2)
Department of Pathology, The University of Illinois Cancer Center, University of Illinois at Chicago

References

  1. Lee S-C, Bajcsy P: Feature based registration of fluorescent LSCM imagery using region centroids. Medical Imaging, February 2005, San Diego, Calif, USA, Proceedings of the SPIE 5747: 170-181.Google Scholar
  2. Collins CL, Ideker JH, Kurtis KE: Laser scanning confocal microscopy for in situ monitoring of alkali-silica reaction. Journal of Microscopy 2004, 213(2):149-157. 10.1111/j.1365-2818.2004.01280.xMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Pawley JB: The Handbook of Biological Confocal Microscopy. Plenum Press, New York, NY, USA; 1990.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Zitova B, Flusser J: Image registration methods: a survey. Image and Vision Computing 2003, 21(11):977-1000. 10.1016/S0262-8856(03)00137-9View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  5. Hill DLG, Batchelor PG, Holden M, Hawkes DJ: Medical image registration. Physics in Medicine and Biology 2001, 46(3):R1-R45. 10.1088/0031-9155/46/3/201View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown LG: A survey of image registration techniques. ACM Computing Surveys 1992, 24(4):325-376. 10.1145/146370.146374View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Cohen LD, Cohen I: Deformable models for 3-D medical images using finite elements and balloons. Proceedings of IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR '92), June 1992, Champaign, Ill, USA 592-598.Google Scholar
  8. Goshtasby A: Registration of images with geometric distortions. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 1988, 26(1):60-64. 10.1109/36.3000View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Tuohy M, McConchie CA, Knox RB, Szarski L, Arkin A: Computer-assisted three-dimensional reconstruction technology in plant cell image analysis; applications of interactive computer graphics. Journal of Microscopy 1987, 147(1):83-88. 10.1111/j.1365-2818.1987.tb02820.xView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Maintz JBA, Viergever MA: A survey of medical image registration. Medical Image Analysis 1998, 2(1):1-36.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  11. Nocito A, Kononen J, Kallioniemi OP, Sauter G: Tissue microarrays (TMAs) for high-throughput molecular pathology research. International Journal of Cancer 2001, 94(1):1-5. 10.1002/ijc.1385View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  12. Goshtasby A, Stockman GC, Page CV: A region-based approach to digital image transformation with subpixel accuracy. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 1986, 24(3):390-399.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Flusser J, Suk T: A moment-based approach to registration of images with affine geometric distortion. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 1994, 32(2):382-387. 10.1109/36.295052View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  14. Li H, Manjunath BS, Mitra SK: A contour-based approach to multisensor image registration. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing 1995, 4(3):320-334. 10.1109/83.366480View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  15. Pratt WK: Correlation techniques of image registration. IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems 1974, 10(3):353-358.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  16. Viola P, Wells WM III: Alignment by maximization of mutual information. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV '95), June 1995, Cambridge, Mass, USA 16-23.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  17. Hermosillo G, Chefd'Hotel C, Faugeras O: Variational methods for multimodal image matching. International Journal of Computer Vision 2002, 50(3):329-343. 10.1023/A:1020830525823View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. Jungke M, Von Seelenon W, Bielke G, et al.: A system for the diagnostic use of tissue characterizing parameters in NMR-tomography. Proceedings of Information Processing in Medical Imaging (IPMI '87), 1987 39: 471-481.Google Scholar
  19. Montgomery K, Ross MD: Non fiducial, shaped-based registration of biological tissue. Three-Dimensional Microscopy: Image Acquisition and Processing III, January 1996, San Jose, Calif, USA, Proceedings of SPIE 2655: 224-232.Google Scholar
  20. Goulden CH: Methods of Statistical Analysis. 2nd edition. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA; 1956.MATHGoogle Scholar
  21. Kooper R, Shirk A, Lee S-C, Lin A, Folberg R, Bajcsy P: 3D medical volume reconstruction using Web services. Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Web Services (ICWS '05), July 2005, Orlando, Fla, USA 716.Google Scholar

Copyright

© Lee et al. 2006