Registrierung von Knochen in 3D-Ultraschall- und CT-Daten: Vergleich verschiedener Optimierungsverfahren

1. Pluim JPW, Fitzpatrick JM. Image registration. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2003;8(22):1341–1343.

   Article  Google Scholar 

2. Ault T, Siegel MW. Frameless patient registration using ultrasonic imaging: A preliminary study. J Image Guid Surg 1995;1:94–102.

   Article  Google Scholar 

3. Amin DV, Kanade T, III AMDiGioia, Jaramaz B, Moody JE, Nikou C, et al. Minimally Invasive Registration Techniques for Surgical Navigation using Intraoperative Ultrasound. In: Procs CAOS; 2002. p. 103–105.

   Google Scholar 

4. Carrat L, Tonetti J, Merloz P, Troccaz J. Percutaneous Computer Assisted Iliosacral Screwing: Clinical Validation. In: Procs MICCAI; 2000. p. 1229–1237.

   Google Scholar 

5. Ioppolo J, Kowal J, Nolte LP. Ultrasonic Registration Techniques. In: Procs CAOS; 2002. p. 295.

   Google Scholar 

6. Brendel B, Winter S, Rick A, Stockheim M, Schmieder K, Ermert H. Registration of 3D CT-and ultrasound-datasets of the spine using bone structures. Comput Aided Surg 2002;7:146–155.

   Article  Google Scholar 

7. Winter S, Brendel B, Rick A, Stockheim M, Schmieder K, Ermert H. Registration of bone surfaces, extracted from CT-datasets, with 3D-ultrasound. Biomed Tech (Berl) 2002;47(1):57–60.

   Article  Google Scholar 

8. Maintz JBA, Viergever MA. A survey of medical image registration. Medical Image Analysis 1998;2(1):1–36.

   Article  Google Scholar 

9. Rouet JM, Jacq JJ, Roux C. Genetic algorithms for a robust 3-D MR-CT registration. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed 2000;4(2):126–136.

   Article  Google Scholar 

10. Kagadis GC, Delibasis KK, Matsopoulos GK, et al. A comparative study of surface-and volume-based techniques for the automatic registration between CT and SPECT brain images. Medical Physics 2002;29(2):201–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

11. Wachowiak MP, Smolíkova R, Zheng Y, Zurada JM, Elmaghraby AS. An Approach to Multimodal Biomedical Image Registration Utilizing Particle Swarm Optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 2004;8(3):289–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

12. Winter S, Brendel B, Illerhaus B, Al-Amin A, Ermert H, Schmieder K. Parametrisierung evolutionärer Strategien für die Registrierung von Wirbelknochen in Ultraschall und CT-Daten. In: Procs BVM; 2004. p. 304–308.

    Google Scholar 

13. Brendel B, Winter S, Ermert H. In vivo Evaluierung und In vitro Genauigkeitsmessung für einen Algorithmus zur Registrierung von Ultraschall-und CTDatensätzen. In: Procs BVM; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

14. Press WH, Teukolsky SA, Vetterling WT, Flannery BP. Numerical Recipes in C. Cambridge University Press; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

15. Riedmiller M. Advanced supervised learning in multi-layer perceptrons-from backpropagation to adaptive learning algorithms. Computer Standards and Interfaces 1994;p. 265–278.

    Google Scholar 

16. Igel C, Hüsken M. Empirical Evaluation of the Improved Rprop Learning Algorithm. Neurocomputing 2003;50(C):105–123.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

17. Hansen N, Ostermeier A. Completely Derandomized Self-Adaptation in Evolution Strategies. Evol Comput 2001;9(2):159–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

18. Hansen N, Kern S. Evaluating the CMA Evolution Strategy on Multimodal Test Functions. In: Yao Xin, et al, editors. Parallel Problem Solving from Nature (PPSN VIII). vol. 3242 of LNCS. Springer; 2004. p. 282–291.

    Google Scholar 

Download references