Cited by 142Medical Image Segmentation TechniquesAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications

Fast generation of digitally reconstructed radiographs using attenuation fields with application to 2D-3D image registration

Russakoff, D.B., Rohlfing, T., Mori, K., Rueckert, D., Ho, A., Adler, J.R., Maurer, C.R.·2005·IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging

Abstract

Generation of digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRRs) is computationally expensive and is typically the rate-limiting step in the execution time of intensity-based two-dimensional to three-dimensional (2D-3D) registration algorithms. We address this computational issue by extending the technique of light field rendering from the computer graphics community. The extension of light fields, which we call attenuation fields (AFs), allows most of the DRR computation to be performed in a preprocessing step; after this precomputation step, DRRs can be generated substantially faster than with conventional ray casting. We derive expressions for the physical sizes of the two planes of an AF necessary to generate DRRs for a given X-ray camera geometry and all possible object motion within a specified range. Because an AF is a ray-based data structure, it is substantially more memory efficient than a huge table of precomputed DRRs because it eliminates the redundancy of replicated rays. Nonetheless, an AF can require substantial memory, which we address by compressing it using vector quantization. We compare DRRs generated using AFs (AF-DRRs) to those generated using ray casting (RC-DRRs) for a typical C-arm geometry and computed tomography images of several anatomic regions. They are quantitatively very similar: the median peak signal-to-noise ratio of AF-DRRs versus RC-DRRs is greater than 43 dB in all cases. We perform intensity-based 2D-3D registration using AF-DRRs and RC-DRRs and evaluate registration accuracy using gold-standard clinical spine image data from four patients. The registration accuracy and robustness of the two methods is virtually identical whereas the execution speed using AF-DRRs is an order of magnitude faster.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tmi.2005.856749

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Russakoff, D. B., Rohlfing, T., Mori, K., Rueckert, D., Ho, A., Adler, J. R., & Maurer, C. R.
Affiliations
  • Stanford University (US)
  • Nagoya University (JP)
  • Imperial College London (GB)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging
Published
2005-11
Volume
24
Issue
11
Pages
1441-1454
ISSN
0278-0062 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2141961390
Cited by
142
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 12
FWCI
13.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Medical Image Segmentation Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Radiation › Advanced Radiotherapy Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Medical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Keywords
digitally reconstructed radiographs, light field rendering, 2D-3D registration, intensity-based registration, ray casting, vector quantization, memory efficiency, C-arm, spinal imaging, precomputation
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Computer Systems, Humans, Radiographic Image Enhancement, Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Scattering, Radiation, Sensitivity and Specificity, Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted, Spine, Subtraction Technique, Reproducibility of Results, Imaging, Three-Dimensional, Surgery, Computer-Assisted

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review