Volumetrically Consistent Implicit Atlas Learning via Neural Diffeomorphic Flow for Placenta MRI
Organizations: MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory · Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School · Boston Children’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School
Abstract
Establishing dense volumetric correspondences across anatomical shapes is essential for group-level analysis but remains challenging for implicit neural representations. Most existing implicit registration methods rely on supervision near the zero-level set and thus capture only surface correspondences, leaving interior deformations under-constrained. We introduce a volumetrically consistent implicit model that couples reconstruction of signed distance functions (SDFs) with neural diffeomorphic flow to learn a shared canonical template of the placenta. Volumetric regularization, including Jacobian-determinant and biharmonic penalties, suppresses local folding and promotes globally coherent deformations. In the motivating application to placenta MRI, our formulation jointly reconstructs individual placentas, aligns them to a population-derived implicit template, and enables voxel-wise intensity mapping in a unified canonical space. Experiments on in-vivo placenta MRI scans demonstrate improved geometric fidelity and volumetric alignment over surface-based implicit baseline methods, yielding anatomically interpretable and topologically consistent flattening suitable for group analysis.
Figures & tables
| Chamfer-L2 | EMD | NC | Precision | Recall | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | @0.01 | @0.03 | @0.05 | @0.01 | @0.03 | @0.05 | @0.01 | @0.03 | @0.05 | |||
| DeepSDF [ 29 ] | 0.27 | 0.05 | 0.97 | 0.24 | 0.98 | 0.99 | 0.24 | 0.99 | 1.00 | 0.24 | 0.99 | 0.99 |
| DIT [ 45 ] | 0.17 | 0.05 | 0.97 | 0.37 | 0.98 | 0.99 | 0.37 | 0.99 | 1.00 | 0.38 | 0.99 | 0.99 |
| DIF-Net [ 12 ] | 0.12 | 0.04 | 0.98 | 0.43 | 0.99 | 1.00 | 0.43 | 0.99 | 1.00 | 0.43 | 0.99 | 1.00 |
| NDF [ 35 ] | 0.22 | 0.05 | 0.97 | 0.28 | 0.99 | 1.00 | 0.28 | 0.99 | 1.00 | 0.28 | 0.99 | 1.00 |
| Ours | 0.12 | 0.04 | 0.98 | 0.43 | 0.99 | 1.00 | 0.43 | 0.99 | 1.00 | 0.43 | 0.99 | 1.00 |
| FlipRate | logDet- | CycleError | |
|---|---|---|---|
| DIF-Net [ 12 ] | 15.34 | 0.81 | 0.24 |
| DIT [ 45 ] | 11.88 | 0.67 | 0.29 |
| NDF [ 35 ] | 8.78 | 0.90 | 0.26 |
| Ours | 4.04 | 0.69 | 0.20 |
| Vol | Areal | Edge | SymDir | Conformal | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DIF-Net [ 12 ] | 4.36 | 2.8 | 2.43 | 12.91 | 11.47 |
| DIT [ 45 ] | 2.02 | 0.99 | 1.13 | 8.48 | 10.89 |
| NDF [ 35 ] | 4.17 | 2.26 | 2.32 | 13.75 | 10.96 |
| Ours | 1.94 | 1.17 | 1.19 | 8.02 | 9.74 |
| Model | CD-L2 | FlipRate | logDet–L1 | SymDir | LapE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.13 | 13.75 | 0.69 | 10.99 | 26.34 | |
| w/ | 0.22 | 10.92 | 0.61 | 9.08 | 22.88 |
| w/ | 0.12 | 14.76 | 0.80 | 12.07 | 33.05 |
| w/ (ours) | 0.12 | 4.04 | 0.69 | 8.02 | 8.72 |
Medical Image Analysis
Medical image analysis uses computational methods to interpret clinical images, measure anatomy and disease, and support diagnosis and treatment.
See all 281 papers