Automated quality assurance of rigid brain CT/MR image registration using a 3D convolutional neural network.

Overview

1. Department of Physics, Beirut Arab University, Beirut, Lebanon
2. Department of Computer Science, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon
3. Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Faculty of Sciences, Beirut Arab University, Beirut, Lebanon
4. Department of Radiation Oncology, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon

Abstract

Background: Accurate CT/MR registration is important in stereotactic brain radiotherapy, where small spatial errors may affect target localization and treatment planning. In many clinical settings, registration quality is still assessed primarily through manual visual inspection. However, time and workflow constraints may limit the consistency and depth of manual evaluation.

Purpose: This study aimed to develop a 3D convolutional neural network (3D CNN)‐based quality assurance (QA) method for rigid brain CT/MR registration using paired sub‐volumes and a registration‐level mean probability score (μ). The proposed method classifies local CT/MR registration quality, while the final registration‐level assessment is based on μ across the sampled sub‐volumes.

Methods: The study included 209 patients. Of these, 202 comprised the primary cohort and were divided patient‐wise into 128 training, 33 validation, and 41 test patients. For each patient, 25 skull‐based CT/MR sub‐volumes of 42 × 42 × 42 voxels were used as a two‐channel CNN input. High‐quality examples were obtained from clinically approved registrations, while low‐quality examples were generated using rigid perturbations of the complete MR volume. The mean predicted probability across the 25 sub‐volumes was used as the registration‐level score μ, and the validation‐derived threshold of 0.5871 was fixed for testing. Seven additional patients, separate from the 202‐patient cohort, were evaluated after model development and threshold selection were completed using registrations before and after physician correction.

Results: On the held‐out test set, patch‐level accuracy was 85.90%, with an ROC AUC of 0.929 and average precision of 0.920. At the registration level, accuracy was 97.56% and ROC AUC was 0.999. All 41 low‐quality registrations were correctly flagged, while 39 of 41 high‐quality registrations were correctly accepted. In the additional clinical evaluation, all seven initial registrations requiring correction were classified as low quality, while six of seven corrected registrations were classified as high quality, resulting in an overall accuracy of 92.86%.

Conclusions: The proposed method combined local CNN predictions into a registration‐level μ score and showed strong performance on held‐out and clinical cases. It may provide a quantitative screening measure for rigid brain CT/MR registration QA while maintaining clinical review as the final decision step.

Reproduced under the paper's license (CC BY), from the paper cited above.

Code

The paper says that its authors' code is available on request: it was not published with the paper, so there is nothing to verify.

The paper's code and data availability statement is in the Data section.

Tracing map

A tracing map links a paper to the code its authors published: this paper has none (its code is available on request), so it has no map.

Data

No dataset and no data link were found in the paper.

Data availability statement

The imaging datasets used in this study contain de‐identified and preprocessed data may be made available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. The custom code developed for data preprocessing, model training, and evaluation is available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Reproduced under the paper's license (CC BY), from the paper cited above.

Versions

The history of this record: each version stored by the harvester or made by a correction of its authors or of the maintainers of its code, and what changed in its facts. The texts of the paper (its abstract, its availability statements) are not part of it; versions that changed only those are not listed.

Version 1, 1 October 2026: the first record

Recorded: type, language, journal, volume, issue, pages, dates, 7 authors, 3 keywords, 12 MeSH terms, 21 references.

Cite

This paper

Chahrour, Z. A., Obeid, N. F., El‐Zaart, A., EL Kanawati, W., Mkanna, A., Assaf, R., & Shahine, B. H. (2026). Automated quality assurance of rigid brain CT/MR image registration using a 3D convolutional neural network. Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 27(10), e70828. https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.70828

Similar papers

The papers with a page that share the most with this one: the tools found in their code, their categories, datasets, cited references and authors, the rarest counting most.

[1] doi:10.3390/life15121871

Multiscale Segmentation-Guided Diffusion Model for CBCT-to-CT Synthesis.

Journal: Life (Basel, Switzerland)

In common: other, 1 reference

[2] doi:10.1162/imag.a.139 [code]

Functional ultrasound imaging combined with machine learning for whole-brain analysis of drug-induced hemodynamic changes.

Journal: Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)

In common: other, 1 reference

[3] doi:10.3389/fnins.2026.1858490 [code]

Comparison of subject-to-template registration schemes using CT and MR radiotherapy images with brain lesions.

Journal: Frontiers in neuroscience

In common: other, 1 reference

[4] doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1014555 [code]

Body surface potential driven personalisation of electrophysiological digital twins in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.

Journal: PLoS computational biology

In common: other, 1 reference

[5] doi:10.1002/mp.17530 [code]

Dose distributions of proton therapy plans are robust against lowering the resolution of CTs combined with increasing noise.

Journal: Medical physics

In common: other, 1 reference

[6] doi:10.1038/s41597-024-03774-3 [code]

A benchmark for 2D foetal brain ultrasound analysis.

Journal: Scientific data

In common: other, 1 reference

[7] doi:10.1038/s41597-024-03337-6 [code]

SAROS: A dataset for whole-body region and organ segmentation in CT imaging.

Journal: Scientific data

In common: other, 1 reference

[8] doi:10.1093/brain/awad346 [code]

Synthesizing images of tau pathology from cross-modal neuroimaging using deep learning.

Journal: Brain : a journal of neurology

In common: 1 reference

[9] doi:10.3390/cancers15061820 [code]

MR-Class: A Python Tool for Brain MR Image Classification Utilizing One-vs-All DCNNs to Deal with the Open-Set Recognition Problem.

Journal: Cancers

In common: 1 reference

[10] doi:10.1038/s41467-025-59839-3 [code]

Deep MALDI-MS spatial omics guided by quantum cascade laser mid-infrared imaging microscopy.

Journal: Nature communications

In common: other, 1 reference

Contribute

The authors of this paper can claim it, correct its record and validate its tracing map, and the maintainers of its code (its owner, or a public member of its organization) correct what it says of their repository; anyone signed in can ask for its removal. Every request goes to OSCR's own machine, which answers it; your account page follows them.

Request its removal

To ask OSCR to remove this record, the copies of its authors' scripts or its tracing map, use the removal request page: signed in, you say who you are, what to remove and why, then review and confirm the request. Published rules decide every request (how).

Discussion: code errors and mismatches between the code and the paper about this paper and its code, from readers and its authors, beside the paper and its tracing map.

Reproductions: reports from readers who ran the authors' code and did not get the paper's result, what they ran, with which environment, commit and data.

Activity: what happens around this paper: new versions of its record, its map's validation, discussions and reproductions. It opens with sign-in.