Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Mar 1.
Published in final edited form as: Radiology. 2014 Nov 7;274(3):752–763. doi: 10.1148/radiol.14132871

Table 3.

The effect of variability in SimCT slice thickness reconstruction on the performance of registration algorithms.

Registration Method Metric STR < 3 mm STR ≥ 3 mm p-value
Mean SD Mean SD
Rigid 95%HD (mm) 15.7 12.4 14.4 11.5 0.25
DSC 0.24 0.22 0.27 0.22 0.006*
Atlas-based 95%HD (mm) 7.2 10.6 7.7 11.2 <0.0001* §
DSC 0.64 0.15 0.65 0.14 0.74
B-spline 95%HD (mm) 10.8 10.1 10.5 11.2 0.02*
DSC 0.41 0.22 0.47 0.20 <0.0001*§
Demons 95%HD (mm) 14.3 12.2 13 11.6 0.17
DSC 0.33 0.25 0.38 0.24 0.0019*§
Optical Flow 95%HD (mm) 16.1 13.2 14.3 11.1 0.14
DSC 0.28 0.22 0.31 0.22 0.0034*§

n = 10 patients,

n = 10 patients,

*

significant p<0.05 for Wilcoxon rank test,

§

significant p<0.005 after Bonferroni correction (α = 0.05/10 “pairwise comparison of 5 DIR algorithms”).

Abbreviations: STR=slice thickness reconstruction, DSC=Dice similarity coefficient, 95%HD=95%Hausdorff distance.