[Insight-users] using 3d registration on a 2d stack of images.

[Karthik Krishnan]

Hi Mark,

If you have multiple breast datasets (each 3D), you can use 3D 
registration to register them against each other. This would allow, as 
you've pointed out greater freedom in terms of allowing deformations in 
3 dimensions as opposed to deformations restricted to a plane in the 2D 
registration case case.

To clarify, we understand that you have multiple 3D breast datasets and 
not "a breast dataset".

You may want to look at deformable registration examples in ITK.

Thanks
Regards
Karthik

Mark Wyszomierski wrote:

>Hi Luis and George, thanks for the replies. The set of images I have
>is a breast dataset acquried from an MRI scanner. Within the stack
>there are a few timepoints, I consider timepoint zero the non moving
>timepoint, and try to register the rest to that timepoint.
>
>My method at the moment is to do 2d registration, slice to slice for
>each of the timepoints. I was thinking though that maybe I could get
>better results if the registration method had the entire volume of the
>timepoints to work with instead of a single slice, so perhaps it could
>look around a greater distance to bring about correction.
>
>Is this a correct idea? Thanks for your replies!
>
>Mark
>
>
>
>
>On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 13:10:06 -0500, Luis Ibanez <luis.ibanez at kitware.com> wrote:
>  
>
>>Hi Mark,
>>
>>You can use ITK for registering N-Dimensional images.
>>
>>For examples on 3D registration please look at
>>
>>  Insight/Examples/Registration/
>>            Imageregistraiton8.cxx
>>            DeformableRegistration7.cxx
>>            DeformableRegistration8.cxx
>>
>>and the applications
>>
>>  InsightApplications/
>>       LandmarkInitializedMutualInformationRegistration/
>>       MIValidation/
>>       VolviewPlugIns/
>>       MultiResMIRegistration/
>>
>>However.... from the description of your problem, it seems
>>that you don't need to do 3D registration. What you have
>>is a series of 2D registration problems.
>>
>>Maybe a better description of your project goals will help
>>us to understand your needs....
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>    Luis
>>
>>-------------------------
>>Mark Wyszomierski wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Hello all,
>>>
>>>I have a stack of 2d slices that I have been using with 2d motion
>>>registration. I have read it is possible to use a 3d registration
>>>method on this stack, which may produce a better result.
>>>
>>>All the registration examples have the image dimensions set at 2. I
>>>also have this setup. I loop through each slice in my moving stack,
>>>load its pixel data into a buffer, and register each buffer with the
>>>corresponding stationary buffer from my stationary image stack.
>>>
>>>If I were to switch this to 3d, should I simply change my dimensions
>>>to 3? Then create a 3d array and load all my moving images into that
>>>3d array? Do the same for the stationary images? Then just have one
>>>registration step where I hand the method both volumes?
>>>
>>>After it's done, can I peel my moving slices out of the registered 3d
>>>array and consider them done?
>>>
>>>Any general guidelines would be great, thanks!
>>>
>>>Mark
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Insight-users mailing list
>>>Insight-users at itk.org
>>>http://www.itk.org/mailman/listinfo/insight-users
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>    
>>
>_______________________________________________
>Insight-users mailing list
>Insight-users at itk.org
>http://www.itk.org/mailman/listinfo/insight-users
>
>  
>