↓ Skip to main content

Registration error of the liver CT using deformable image registration of MIM Maestro and Velocity AI

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Imaging, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Registration error of the liver CT using deformable image registration of MIM Maestro and Velocity AI
Published in
BMC Medical Imaging, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12880-017-0202-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nobuyoshi Fukumitsu, Kazunori Nitta, Toshiyuki Terunuma, Toshiyuki Okumura, Haruko Numajiri, Yoshiko Oshiro, Kayoko Ohnishi, Masashi Mizumoto, Teruhito Aihara, Hitoshi Ishikawa, Koji Tsuboi, Hideyuki Sakurai

Abstract

Understanding the irradiated area and dose correctly is important for the reirradiation of organs that deform after irradiation, such as the liver. We investigated the spatial registration error using the deformable image registration (DIR) software products MIM Maestro (MIM) and Velocity AI (Velocity). Image registration of pretreatment computed tomography (CT) and posttreatment CT was performed in 24 patients with liver tumors. All the patients received proton beam therapy, and the follow-up period was 4-14 (median: 10) months. We performed DIR of the pretreatment CT and compared it with that of the posttreatment CT by calculating the dislocation of metallic markers (implanted close to the tumors). The fiducial registration error was comparable in both products: 0.4-32.9 (9.3 ± 9.9) mm for MIM and 0.5-38.6 (11.0 ± 10.0) mm for Velocity, and correlated with the tumor diameter for MIM (r = 0.69, P = 0.002) and for Velocity (r = 0.68, P = 0.0003). Regarding the enhancement effect, the fiducial registration error was 1.0-24.9 (7.4 ± 7.7) mm for MIM and 0.3-29.6 (8.9 ± 7.2) mm for Velocity, which is shorter than that of plain CT (P = 0.04, for both). The DIR performance of both MIM and Velocity is comparable with regard to the liver. The fiducial registration error of DIR depends on the tumor diameter. Furthermore, contrast-enhanced CT improves the accuracy of both MIM and Velocity. H28-102; July 14, 2016 approved.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 41 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 22%
Researcher 7 17%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 7 17%
Unknown 10 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 39%
Physics and Astronomy 6 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Philosophy 1 2%
Unspecified 1 2%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 13 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 November 2017.
All research outputs
#17,919,066
of 23,007,053 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Imaging
#338
of 605 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#222,061
of 310,984 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Imaging
#5
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,053 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 605 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 310,984 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.