ArticleJournal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.)2024
The Image-to-Physical Liver Registration Sparse Data Challenge: comparison of state-of-the-art using a common dataset.
Article in Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Strain alignment: toward assessing mechanical plausibility of predicted displacement fields.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2026Article
- Robust Point Cloud Registration via Rotation-Equivariant Geometric Encoding and State Space Models.Journal of imaging · 2026Article
- Resolving the Ambiguity of Complete-to-Partial Point Cloud Registration for Image-Guided Liver Surgery With Patches-to-Partial Matching.IEEE journal of biomedical and health informatics · 2026Article
- Toward Patient-Specific Partial Point Cloud to Surface Completion for Pre to Intra-operative Registration in Image-Guided Liver Interventions.Medical Image Understanding and Analysis. Medical Image Understanding and Analysis (Conference) · 2026Article
- Point cloud registration algorithm using liver vascular skeleton feature with computed tomography and ultrasonography image fusion.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2025Article
- A real-time virtual liver simulator using position based dynamics with compliant constraints for medical applications.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Boundary Constraint-Free Biomechanical Model-Based Surface Matching for Intraoperative Liver Deformation Correction.IEEE transactions on medical imaging · 2025Article
- Evaluation of Intra-operative Patient-specific Methods for Point Cloud Completion for Minimally Invasive Liver Interventions.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering · 2025Article
- Welcome to the second issue of theJournal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2024Article
- The Image-to-Physical Liver Registration Sparse Data Challenge: comparison of state-of-the-art using a common dataset.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2024Article
- Assessing Learning-Based Reconstructed Liver Surfaces From Partial Point Clouds for Improving Pre- to Intra-Operative 3D to 3D Registration.Healthcare technology lettersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: Computational methods for image-to-physical registration during surgical guidance frequently rely on sparse point clouds obtained over a limited region of the organ surface. However, soft tissue deformations complicate the ability to accurately infer anatomical alignments from sparse descriptors of the organ surface. The Image-to-Physical Liver Registration Sparse Data Challenge introduced at SPIE Medical Imaging 2019 seeks to characterize the performance of sparse data registration methods on a common dataset to benchmark and identify effective tactics and limitations that will continue to inform the evolution of image-to-physical registration algorithms. Approach: Three rigid and five deformable registration methods were contributed to the challenge. The deformable approaches consisted of two deep learning and three biomechanical boundary condition reconstruction methods. These algorithms were compared on a common dataset of 112 registration scenarios derived from a tissue-mimicking phantom with 159 subsurface validation targets. Target registration errors (TRE) were evaluated under varying conditions of data extent, target location, and measurement noise. Jacobian determinants and strain magnitudes were compared to assess displacement field consistency. Results: Rigid registration algorithms produced significant differences in TRE ranging from Conclusions: The choice of registration algorithm significantly impacts registration accuracy and variability of deformation fields. Among current sparse data driven image-to-physical registration algorithms, biomechanical simulations that incorporate task-specific insight into boundary conditions seem to offer best performance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.