Uncertainty-aware registration for probabilistic margin assessment in renal cell carcinoma ablation.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL
Libin Liang, Shuwei Xing, Suzanne M Wong, Derek W Cool, Aaron Fenster
{"title":"Uncertainty-aware registration for probabilistic margin assessment in renal cell carcinoma ablation.","authors":"Libin Liang, Shuwei Xing, Suzanne M Wong, Derek W Cool, Aaron Fenster","doi":"10.1088/1361-6560/aeb2a1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Quantitative assessment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) ablation margins requires reliable registration of pre- and post-ablation images. However, ablation-related tissue changes weaken local anatomical correspondence, making deformation estimates potentially non-unique. We developed an uncertainty-aware registration framework for more reliable margin estimation.&#xD;Approach: An ensemble of plausible registrations was generated by stochastically sampling key registration settings, including the registration mask, similarity metric, B-spline grid spacing, and initial alignment, with Latin hypercube sampling used to improve parameter-space coverage. Registration uncertainty was characterized from this ensemble and propagated into probabilistic margin estimation. Evaluation used 25 biomechanically simulated cases with known deformation fields and 47 clinical RCC cases.&#xD;Main results: In simulation, 98 ± 2% of kidney voxels had a mean displacement error below 1 mm, and uncertainty was strongly associated with registration error (median case-wise Spearman correlation, 0.99). In the clinical study, our method achieved anatomical alignment consistent with the deterministic baselines, with a median kidney Dice similarity coefficient of 0.944 and a median local mean absolute surface distance of 0.5 mm. In general, our method maintained a sensitivity of 1.00 while achieving higher positive predictive value (PPV) than the deterministic methods. Under the global criterion, PPV was 0.70 versus 0.54-0.58, although the pairwise differences between our method and each deterministic method were not statistically significant. Under the focal criterion, PPV was 0.78 versus 0.29-0.50. The pairwise differences were significant between our method and the standard and penalty-constrained B-spline methods (both p<0.001), but not between our method and the diffeomorphic method (p=0.063). &#xD;Significance: The framework extends registration uncertainty estimation to RCC ablation-margin assessment by converting variability in plausible correspondences into probabilistic margin maps. It highlights negative-margin regions consistently identified across registrations, reduces registration-sensitive false-positive local tumor progression predictions, and may support more reliable postoperative evaluation.&#xD.</p>","PeriodicalId":20185,"journal":{"name":"Physics in medicine and biology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physics in medicine and biology","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/aeb2a1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Quantitative assessment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) ablation margins requires reliable registration of pre- and post-ablation images. However, ablation-related tissue changes weaken local anatomical correspondence, making deformation estimates potentially non-unique. We developed an uncertainty-aware registration framework for more reliable margin estimation. Approach: An ensemble of plausible registrations was generated by stochastically sampling key registration settings, including the registration mask, similarity metric, B-spline grid spacing, and initial alignment, with Latin hypercube sampling used to improve parameter-space coverage. Registration uncertainty was characterized from this ensemble and propagated into probabilistic margin estimation. Evaluation used 25 biomechanically simulated cases with known deformation fields and 47 clinical RCC cases. Main results: In simulation, 98 ± 2% of kidney voxels had a mean displacement error below 1 mm, and uncertainty was strongly associated with registration error (median case-wise Spearman correlation, 0.99). In the clinical study, our method achieved anatomical alignment consistent with the deterministic baselines, with a median kidney Dice similarity coefficient of 0.944 and a median local mean absolute surface distance of 0.5 mm. In general, our method maintained a sensitivity of 1.00 while achieving higher positive predictive value (PPV) than the deterministic methods. Under the global criterion, PPV was 0.70 versus 0.54-0.58, although the pairwise differences between our method and each deterministic method were not statistically significant. Under the focal criterion, PPV was 0.78 versus 0.29-0.50. The pairwise differences were significant between our method and the standard and penalty-constrained B-spline methods (both p<0.001), but not between our method and the diffeomorphic method (p=0.063). Significance: The framework extends registration uncertainty estimation to RCC ablation-margin assessment by converting variability in plausible correspondences into probabilistic margin maps. It highlights negative-margin regions consistently identified across registrations, reduces registration-sensitive false-positive local tumor progression predictions, and may support more reliable postoperative evaluation. .

肾细胞癌消融中概率边缘评估的不确定性意识登记。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Physics in medicine and biology
Physics in medicine and biology 医学-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
409
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The development and application of theoretical, computational and experimental physics to medicine, physiology and biology. Topics covered are: therapy physics (including ionizing and non-ionizing radiation); biomedical imaging (e.g. x-ray, magnetic resonance, ultrasound, optical and nuclear imaging); image-guided interventions; image reconstruction and analysis (including kinetic modelling); artificial intelligence in biomedical physics and analysis; nanoparticles in imaging and therapy; radiobiology; radiation protection and patient dose monitoring; radiation dosimetry
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书