14 March 2013 Freehand ultrasound calibration: phantom versus tracked pointer
Author Affiliations +
Abstract
PURPOSE: Ultrasound-guided tracked navigation requires spatial calibration between the ultrasound beam and the tracker. We examined the reproducibility and accuracy of two popular open source calibration methods1 with a handheld linear ultrasound transducer. METHODS: A total of 10 calibrations were performed using (1) a double N-wire phantom with automatic image segmentation and registration; (2) and registration of landmark points collected with a tracked pointer. Reproducibility and accuracy were characterized by comparing the resulting transformation matrices, and by comparing ground truth landmark points. RESULTS: Transformation matrices calculated with an N-wire phantom showed a variance of X: 0.02 mm (in the direction of sound propagation), Y: 0.03 mm (in the direction of transducer elements) and Z: 0.21 mm (in the elevation direction). Transformation matrices obtained with tracked pointer showed a variance of X: 0.1 mm, Y: 0.10 mm and Z: 0.43 mm. Calibration accuracy was tested with ground truth cross wire points. The N-wire phantom provided a calibration with a distance from ground truth of X: 2.44 ± 1.44 mm, Y: 1.21 ± 0.88 mm, and Z: 1.12 ± 0.82 mm. Tracked pointer calibration had a distance from the ground truth of X: 0.23 ± 0.16 mm, Y: 0.62 ± 0.31 mm, and Z: 0.45 ± 0.33 mm. Distance from ground truth was significantly less (p<0.01) with the tracked pointer method in all directions. CONCLUSION: Calibration using a tracked pointer had a slightly greater variance; however it showed better accuracy over calibrations calculated with N-wire phantoms.
© (2013) COPYRIGHT Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE). Downloading of the abstract is permitted for personal use only.
Mattea Welch, Jennifer Andrea, Tamas Ungi, Gabor Fichtinger, "Freehand ultrasound calibration: phantom versus tracked pointer", Proc. SPIE 8671, Medical Imaging 2013: Image-Guided Procedures, Robotic Interventions, and Modeling, 86711C (14 March 2013); doi: 10.1117/12.2007922; https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2007922
PROCEEDINGS
6 PAGES


SHARE
Back to Top