ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2026
Real-time target tracking using image registration and motion prediction.
Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeReal-time tracking of anatomical targets is critical in numerous clinical interventions. In magnetic resonance-guided therapies, targets are typically tracked only in 2D or pseudo-3D, and system latencies from image acquisition and processing introduce delays. This study investigates methods that leverage 2D magnetic resonance images to estimate the real-time displacement of a target from its reference position.
methodsTarget displacements from their reference position on a pre-treatment image were measured using image registration. These measurements served as inputs to machine learning models that capture patient-specific motion patterns and predict subsequent displacements. Specifically, the models were trained incrementally as measurements became available, adapting to patient-specific characteristics. LightGBM, linear regression, long short-term memory (LSTM) and support vector regression (SVR) models were evaluated for their ability to perform online updates from sparse measurements and for their accuracy in forecasting upcoming target displacements. Hyperparameters were optimized using five subject datasets representative of those acquired during clinical procedures. The methods were assessed on forty-nine independent datasets.
resultsTarget tracking achieved a baseline registration error of 1.65 mm. Introducing system latencies ranging from 200 to 600 ms resulted in additional latency-induced errors of 0.81 to 1.98 mm. Linear regression and SVR models provided the greatest accuracy gains, reducing the latency-induced errors by 35 to 57%. In contrast, the LightGBM and LSTM models exhibited comparatively lower predictive performance, likely due to limited training data and the increased model complexity. Linear regression was the most computationally efficient, requiring only 15 ms for combined online retraining and inference in both datasets.
conclusionsCombining image registration with lightweight, patient-specific predictive modeling to mitigate system latencies can enable accurate real-time target tracking. Among the evaluated methods, linear regression and SVR achieved the most favorable balance between prediction accuracy and computational efficiency. These findings support the feasibility of robust real-time tracking without reliance on prior assumptions about target shape or motion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41979821What 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.