Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
Claims 4, 6, 13 and 17, limitation as in the phrase “predicting a unit”, or “imaging device”, (non-structural term) followed by a functional language has/have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use a generic placeholder “device or unit or module” coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function.
If applicant does not intend to have the claim limitation(s) treated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112 , sixth paragraph, applicant may amend the claim(s) so that it/they will clearly not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, or present a sufficient showing that the claim recites/recite sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function to preclude application of 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
For more information, see MPEP § 2173 et seq. and Supplementary Examination Guidelines for Determining Compliance With 35 U.S.C. 112 and for Treatment of Related Issues in Patent Applications, 76 FR 7162, 7167 (Feb. 9, 2011).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
35 U.S.C. 101 requires that a claimed invention must fall within one of the four eligible categories of invention (i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter) and must not be directed to subject matter encompassing a judicially recognized exception as interpreted by the courts. MPEP 2106. The four eligible categories of invention include: (1) process which is an act, or a series of acts or steps, (2) machine which is an concrete thing, consisting of parts, or of certain devices and combination of devices, (3) manufacture which is an article produced from raw or prepared materials by giving to these materials new forms, qualities, properties, or combinations, whether by hand labor or by machinery, and (4) composition of matter which is all compositions of two or more substances and all composite articles, whether they be the results of chemical union, or of mechanical mixture, or whether they be gases, fluids, powders or solids. MPEP 2106(I).
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 abstract idea, while the claims recite a series of steps or acts to be performed, as an example such as, “one or more intravascular images of a vessel of a patient and one or more non-invasive vascular images of the vessel of the patient”.
Prong 1 analysis:
The steps do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. The recited steps could be implemented by the user or a human operator observing an image, recited steps “one or more intravascular images of a vessel of a patient and one or more non-invasive vascular images of the vessel of the patient; determining a trajectory of the one or more intravascular images in the one or more non-invasive vascular images”.
mental process"
"Insignificant extra-solution activity" for software
"Generic computer component"
The steps do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea, they are recited at a high level of generality and are conventional, well known and routine. The claim as a whole is an abstract idea.
Accordingly, the analysis under prong one of step 2A of the Subject Matter Eligibility Test does not result in a conclusion of eligibility (See flowchart MPEP 2106).
DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(e), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 6, 7, 8, 10, 15, 17, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (2) based upon a public use or sale or other public availability of the invention as being anticipated by Sturm (Pub. No.: U.S. 2023/0334677 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Sturm discloses a computer-implemented method comprising: receiving 1) one or more intravascular images of a vessel of a patient and 2) one or more non-invasive vascular images of the vessel of the patient (see page 1, paragraphs, [0001] and [0005], the present disclosure relates generally to co-registering data from different medical diagnostic modalities. In particular, “intravascular data and blood vessel” metrics from angiography images may be co-registered to a three-dimensional computed tomography-based model by co-registering the intravascular data with a computed tomography-based two-dimensional pathway and projecting the intravascular data to the three-dimensional computed tomography-based model. It also provides exact locations of measurements, such as vessel or lumen diameter, pressure ratio, and blood flow, in a three-dimensional CT-based model giving the physician more accurate and more detailed views of a patient's anatomy. Also see page 1, paragraph, [0003] in the field of intravascular imaging and physiology measurement, co-registration of data from invasive devices (e.g. intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) devices or instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) devices) with images collected non-invasively (e.g. via x-ray angiography) is a powerful technique for improving the efficiency and accuracy of vascular catheterization procedures. Co-registration identifies the locations of intravascular data measurements along a blood vessel by mapping the data to an angiography image of the vessel. A physician may then know exactly where in the vessel a measurement was made, rather than estimate the location. Also, page 4, paragraph, [0044], FIG. 2 is a diagrammatic view of an intravascular device 146, according to aspects of the present disclosure. The intravascular device 146 may be any type of invasive intravascular device used to acquire data from within the body of a patient. For example, the intravascular device 146 could be a catheter, a guide wire, or a guide catheter);
determining a trajectory of the one or more intravascular images in the one or more non-invasive vascular images; and outputting the trajectory (see page 2, paragraphs, [0009-0010], determine if the first 2D pathway and the second 2D pathway (trajectory), are comparable; and perform the first co-registration only in response to determining that the first 2D pathway and the second 2D pathway are comparable. In some aspects, the processor circuit is configured to: compute a “similarity measure” representative of if the first 2D pathway and the second 2D pathway are comparable; in some aspects, the processor circuit is configured to: generate a plurality of 2D pathways of the blood vessel using the 3D model of the blood vessel based on CT imaging data; and select a given 2D pathway of the plurality of 2D pathways as the second 2D pathway when the given 2D pathway and the first 2D pathway are comparable. In some aspects, the plurality of 2D pathways correspond to a plurality of angles for projecting the 3D model to a 2D plane. In some aspects, the processor circuit is configured to use an angle at which the plurality of x-ray fluoroscopy images were obtained to generate the second 2D pathway. In some aspects, the processor circuit is configured to compute a first projection of the 3D model to a 2D plane to generate the second 2D pathway. In some aspects, the intravascular data comprises at least one of pressure data, flow data (direction), or imaging data. In some aspects, the co-registration system comprises the intravascular catheter or guidewire. In some aspects, the first 2D pathway and the second 2D pathway are representative of a same portion of the blood vessel. [0010] the co-registration system comprises a processor circuit configured for communication with a display and an x-ray angiography device, wherein the processor circuit is configured to: receive, from the x-ray angiography device, an x-ray angiography image of the blood vessel while the intravascular catheter or guidewire moves through the blood vessel; determine a metric representative of the blood vessel based on the x-ray angiography image; determine, using the x-ray angiography image, a first two-dimensional (2D) pathway of the blood vessel; generate a second 2D pathway of the blood vessel using a three-dimensional (3D) model of the blood vessel based on computed tomography (CT) imaging data; perform a first co-registration between the metric and the second 2D pathway based on a mapping between corresponding locations of the first 2D pathway and the second 2D pathway; perform a second co-registration between the metric and the 3D model based on the first co-registration; and output, to the display.
Also, page 11, paragraph, [0091] in some embodiments, the system 100 may create the set of CT-based 2D pathways 920 based on angles of projection 990 similar to the imaging angle 1090, or the angle of the x-ray source and detector when the fluoroscopy images 1010 were acquired. For example, the system 100 may generate one CT-based 2D pathway 920 at a projection angle 990 equal to the imaging angle 1090. The system may then vary the projection angle 990 by 5 degrees in a given direction, as an illustrative example and generate an additional CT-based 2D pathway 920 from the updated projection angle 990. The system 100 may determine ranges of projection angles 990 in any suitable direction at which a pathway 920 is created. For example, the system 100 may vary the projection angle 990 by a maximum of 15 degrees in each direction as opposed to generating pathways 920 from all directions to limit the number of CT-based 2D pathways 920 required).
Regarding claim 6, Sturm discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein determining a trajectory of the one or more intravascular images in the one or more non-invasive vascular images comprises: simulating a pullback of an imaging device acquiring the one or more intravascular images as the trajectory (see claim 1, also page 9, paragraphs, [0079] and [0081], at step 615, the patient anatomy may be imaged with an x-ray device while a physician performs a “pullback” with an intravascular device 1020 such that the intravascular device 1020 moves through a blood vessel of the anatomy. The x-ray device used to obtain the fluoroscopy images may be substantially similar to the x-ray device of FIG. 3 or the x-ray fluoroscopy imaging device 166 of FIG. 1. In some embodiments, the fluoroscopy images 1010 may be obtained while no contrast agent is present within the patient vasculature. Such an embodiment is shown by the fluoroscopy images 1010 in FIG. 10. The radiopaque portion of the intravascular device 1020 is visible within the displayed fluoroscopy image 1010 as indicated by the circle 1025. The fluoroscopy images 1010 may correspond to a continuous image stream of fluoroscopy images and may be obtained as the patient anatomy is exposed to a reduced dose of x-radiation. It is noted that the fluoroscopy images 1210 may be acquired with the x-ray source 360 and the x-ray detector 370 positioned at any suitable angle in relation to the patient anatomy. This angle is shown by angle 1090. In addition, as shown by the axes 1098, the fluoroscopy images 1010 are two-dimensional. As the intravascular device 1020 is pulled through the patient vasculature, it may acquire intravascular data 1030. In an example, the intravascular data 1030 shown in FIG. 10 may be IVUS images. However, the intravascular data may be any suitable data, including IVUS images, FFR data, iFR data, OCT data, or any other measurements or metrics relating to blood pressure, blood flow, “lumen diameter”, or other physiological data acquired during a pullback of an intravascular device).
Regarding claim 7, Sturm discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 6, further comprising: registering the one or more intravascular images and the one or more non-invasive vascular images based on the simulated pullback and one or more landmarks in the one or more intravascular images and the one or more non-invasive vascular images (see claim 6, also page 9, paragraphs, [0081] and [0083], as the intravascular device 1020 is pulled through the patient vasculature, it may acquire intravascular data 1030. In an example, the intravascular data 1030 shown in FIG. 10 may be IVUS images. However, the intravascular data may be any suitable data, including IVUS images, FFR data, iFR data, OCT data, or any other measurements or metrics relating to blood pressure, blood flow, lumen diameter, or other physiological data acquired during a pullback of an intravascular device. Any suitable number of IVUS images or other intravascular data 1030 may be acquired during an intravascular device pullback and any suitable number of fluoroscopy images 1010 may be obtained. In some embodiments, there may be a one-to-one ratio of fluoroscopy images 1010 and intravascular data 1030. In other embodiments, there may be differing numbers of fluoroscopy images 1010 and/or intravascular data 1030. The process of co-registering the intravascular data 1030 with the fluoroscopy images 1010 at step 630 may include some features similar to those described in U.S. Pat. No. 7,930,014, titled, “VASCULAR IMAGE CO-REGISTRATION,”).
Regarding claim 8, Sturm discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising: constructing a 3D mesh modelling the vessel based on contours in the one or more intravascular images using the trajectory (see claim 1, also page 1, paragraphs, [0005-0006] embodiments of the present disclosure are systems, devices, and methods for co-registering intravascular data and angiography data such as blood vessel metrics to a three-dimensional CT-based model. This advantageously provides guidance to the physician concerning locations of features of interest, such as occlusions, within a blood vessel. It also provides exact locations of measurements, such as vessel or lumen diameter, pressure ratio, and blood flow, in a three-dimensional CT-based model giving the physician more accurate and more detailed views of a patient's anatomy. A system configured to perform the co-registration may include an intravascular device, an x-ray imaging device, and a CT device, all in communication with a co-registration system. In one aspect, the co-registration system receives x-ray fluoroscopy images of a patient vasculature at a given angle while an intravascular device moves through the vasculature collecting data. The intravascular data is mapped to the fluoroscopy images associating the intravascular data with locations along a two-dimensional pathway. The system also receives CT imaging data of the same vasculature which is used to construct a three-dimensional model. The three-dimensional CT-based model is used to create multiple CT-based two-dimensional pathways at different angles. The multiple CT-based pathways are compared to the fluoroscopy-based pathway. The system identifies the CT-based pathway that is most similar to the fluoroscopy-based pathway. The locations along the fluoroscopy-based pathway are mapped to the same locations along the selected CT-based pathway and the intravascular data is associated with corresponding locations of the CT-based pathway. The two-dimensional CT-based pathway and its associated intravascular data is then projected back to the three-dimensional CT-based model. The intravascular data may then be displayed at the correct locations within the three-dimensional CT-based model).
Regarding claim 17, Sturm discloses the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 15, wherein determining a trajectory of the one or more intravascular images in the one or more non- invasive vascular images comprises: simulating a pullback of an imaging device acquiring the one or more intravascular images as the trajectory (see page 9, paragraphs, [0079] and [0081], at step 615, the patient anatomy may be imaged with an x-ray device while a physician performs a pullback with an intravascular device 1020 such that the intravascular device 1020 moves through a blood vessel of the anatomy. The x-ray device used to obtain the fluoroscopy images 1010 may be substantially similar to the x-ray device 300 of FIG. 3 or the x-ray fluoroscopy imaging device 166 of FIG. 1. In some embodiments, the fluoroscopy images 1010 may be obtained while no contrast agent is present within the patient vasculature. Such an embodiment is shown by the fluoroscopy images 1010 in FIG. 10. The radiopaque portion of the intravascular device 1020 is visible within the displayed fluoroscopy image 1010 as indicated by the circle 1025. The fluoroscopy images 1010 may correspond to a continuous image stream of fluoroscopy images and may be obtained as the patient anatomy is exposed to a reduced dose of x-radiation. It is noted that the fluoroscopy images 1210 may be acquired with the x-ray source 360 and the x-ray detector 370 positioned at any suitable angle in relation to the patient anatomy. This angle is shown by angle 1090. In addition, as shown by the axes 1098, the fluoroscopy images 1010 are two-dimensional. As the intravascular device 1020 is pulled through the patient vasculature, it may acquire intravascular data 1030. In an example, the intravascular data 1030 shown in FIG. 10 may be IVUS images. However, the intravascular data may be any suitable data, including IVUS images, FFR data, iFR data, OCT data, or any other measurements or metrics relating to blood pressure, blood flow, lumen diameter, or other physiological data acquired during a pullback of an intravascular device).
Regarding claim 18, Sturm discloses the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 17, the operations further comprising: registering the one or more intravascular images and the one or more non-invasive vascular images based on the simulated pullback and one or more landmarks in the one or more intravascular images and the one or more non-invasive vascular images (see claim 6, also page 9, paragraphs, [0081] and [0083], as the intravascular device 1020 is pulled through the patient vasculature, it may acquire intravascular data 1030. In an example, the intravascular data 1030 shown in FIG. 10 may be IVUS images. However, the intravascular data may be any suitable data, including IVUS images, FFR data, iFR data, OCT data, or any other measurements or metrics relating to blood pressure, blood flow, lumen diameter, or other physiological data acquired during a pullback of an intravascular device. Any suitable number of IVUS images or other intravascular data 1030 may be acquired during an intravascular device pullback and any suitable number of fluoroscopy images 1010 may be obtained. In some embodiments, there may be a one-to-one ratio of fluoroscopy images 1010 and intravascular data 1030. In other embodiments, there may be differing numbers of fluoroscopy images 1010 and/or intravascular data 1030. The process of co-registering the intravascular data 1030 with the fluoroscopy images 1010 at step 630 may include some features similar to those described in U.S. Pat. No. 7,930,014, titled, “VASCULAR IMAGE CO-REGISTRATION,” and filed Jan. 11, 2006, which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety. The co-registration process may also include some features similar to those described in U.S. Pat. Nos. 8,290,228, 8,463,007, 8,670,603, 8,693,756, 8,781,193, 8,855,744).
Regarding claim 19, Sturm discloses the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 15, the operations further comprising: constructing a 3D mesh modelling the vessel based on contours in the one or more intravascular images using the trajectory (see page 1, paragraphs, [0005-0006] embodiments of the present disclosure are systems, devices, and methods for co-registering intravascular data and angiography data such as blood vessel metrics to a three-dimensional CT-based model. This advantageously provides guidance to the physician concerning locations of features of interest, such as occlusions, within a blood vessel. It also provides exact locations of measurements, such as vessel or lumen diameter, pressure ratio, and blood flow, in a three-dimensional CT-based model giving the physician more accurate and more detailed views of a patient's anatomy. A system configured to perform the co-registration may include an intravascular device, an x-ray imaging device, and a CT device, all in communication with a co-registration system. In one aspect, the co-registration system receives x-ray fluoroscopy images of a patient vasculature at a given angle while an intravascular device moves through the vasculature collecting data. The intravascular data is mapped to the fluoroscopy images associating the intravascular data with locations along a two-dimensional pathway. The system also receives CT imaging data of the same vasculature which is used to construct a three-dimensional model. The three-dimensional CT-based model is used to create multiple CT-based two-dimensional pathways at different angles. The multiple CT-based pathways are compared to the fluoroscopy-based pathway. The system identifies the CT-based pathway that is most similar to the fluoroscopy-based pathway. The locations along the fluoroscopy-based pathway are mapped to the same locations along the selected CT-based pathway and the intravascular data is associated with corresponding locations of the CT-based pathway. The two-dimensional CT-based pathway and its associated intravascular data is then projected back to the three-dimensional CT-based model. The intravascular data may then be displayed at the correct locations within the three-dimensional CT-based model.
With regard to claims 10 and 15 the arguments analogous to those presented above for claims 1, 6, 7, 8, 17, 18 and 19, are respectively applicable to claims10 and 15.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 2, 3, 11, 12 and 16, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sturm (Pub. No.: U.S. 2023/0334677 A1) in view of Gulsun et al (U.S. Pub No: 2009/0278846 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Sturm discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein determining a trajectory of the one or more intravascular images in the one or more non-invasive vascular images comprises: defining a “cost function” comprising at least one of: 1) a fit function that measures a similarity between a contour of the vessel in the one or more intravascular images and in the one or more non-invasive vascular images or 2) a fit function that measures a similarity between the one or more intravascular images and the one or more non- invasive vascular images; and optimizing the cost function to determine the trajectory.
However, regarding claim 2, Sturm clearly discloses, pages 1 and 12, paragraphs, [0009] and [0100], in some aspects, the processor circuit is configured to: determine if the first 2D pathway and the second 2D pathway are comparable; and perform the first co-registration only in response to determining that the first 2D pathway and the second 2D pathway are comparable to compute a “similarity measure” representative of if the first 2D pathway and the second 2D pathway are comparable; determine that the first 2D pathway and the second 2D pathway are comparable when the similarity measure satisfies a threshold. In some aspects, the processor circuit is configured to: generate a plurality of 2D pathways of the blood vessel using the 3D model of the blood vessel based on CT “imaging data”; and select a given 2D pathway of the plurality of 2D pathways as the second 2D pathway when the given 2D pathway and the first 2D pathway are comparable. In some aspects, the plurality of 2D pathways correspond to a plurality of angles for projecting the 3D model to a 2D plane. In some aspects, the processor circuit is configured to use an angle at which the plurality of x-ray fluoroscopy images were obtained to generate the second 2D pathway. In some aspects, the processor circuit is configured to compute a first projection of the 3D model to a 2D plane to generate the second 2D pathway. In some aspects, the processor circuit is configured to compute a second projection from the second 2D pathway to the 3D model to perform the second co-registration, wherein second projection is an inverse of the first projection. In some aspects, the intravascular data comprises at least one of pressure data, flow data, or imaging data. As stated in step 630, the system 100 may identify a pathway 920 that is “similar or comparable” to the fluoroscopy-based 2D pathway 1040. In some embodiments, the system 100 or a user of the system 100 may determine a threshold value corresponding to the stored metrics of separation “between points along the pathways”1040 and 920. In some embodiments, the separation between points along the pathways 1040 and 920 may be added, averaged, multiplied or otherwise combined to create a similarity measure corresponding to the comparison between the pathways 1040 and 920. The similarity measure may also be referred to as a similarity index. The similarity measure may be determined via any suitable method or may be of any suitable type. For example, the similarity measure may be based on distances between points along both pathways 1040 and 920 as stated. The similarity measure may also be based on the curvature (contour)or tortuosity of regions of vessels within the pathways 1040 and 920, the lengths of vessels within the pathways, locations of occlusions of the vessels within the pathways, locations of bifurcations within the vessels, or any other anatomical landmarks within the vessels shown in the pathways 1040 and 920. In an embodiment, in order for a CT-based 2D pathway 920 to be sufficiently similar to the fluoroscopy-based pathway 1040, this combined similarity measure must satisfy (e.g., greater than, less than, equal to) a predetermined threshold value. In another embodiment, in order for a CT-based 2D pathway 920 to be sufficiently similar to the fluoroscopy-based pathway 1040, each metric of separation between corresponding points along the pathways 1040 and 920 must satisfy (e.g., greater than, less than, equal to) the predetermined threshold. In some embodiments, the CT-based 2D pathway 920 which shows the least differences between corresponding points along pathways 1040 and 920 in FIG. 12.
But does not explicitly state, “cost function” (similarity between two image).
On the other hand, “Gulsun”, in the same field of “geometric modeling of tubular structures from medical images such as Tomography Angiography (CTA) and Magnetic Resonance Angiography (MRA). The most common tubular structures include blood vessels, airways in lungs”, teaches (see page 1, paragraph, [0010] according to an aspect of the invention, there is provided a method for extracting a centerline of a tubular structure in a digital medical image, including providing a 3-dimensional (3D) digitized medical image, the image comprising a plurality of intensities on a 3D lattice of points and having a segmented tubular structure, providing a starting point in the tubular structure, finding a path in the image between the starting point and every other point in the tubular structure that minimizes an accumulative cost function, where the minimum accumulative cost .phi.(x) at a point x is a minimum of overall nearest neighbors x' where P.sub.x,x' is a cost of propagation from point x to x', which is obtained from the inverse of a medialness measure computed in a plane orthogonal to a line between x and x' that is centered at a mid-point of the line between x and x', the medialness measure m(x) computed in a circular region C(x, R) centered at point x on the path, with radius R, given by EQU00003## where {right arrow over, and f(x.sub.0,R{right arrow over (u)}(.alpha.)) is a fit measure along vector {right arrow over (u)}(.alpha.) starting from x.sub.0,, ##EQU00004## where M is the number of background points. Also, page 5, paragraph, [0047] Suppose that the propagation has converged at lime t.sub.f with a set of graph nodes, F=(P.sub.1, . . . , P.sub.K), representing a discrete front F, such as that shown in FIG. 6(a). A minimum-cost path between each point P.sub.i of a discrete front, F and the source P.sub.0 can be computed from the minimum accumulative cost map, .phi., resulting in K different paths. Most of these paths are redundant, i.e., a single vessel branch should be represented by a single centerline or a single front point. In addition, the existence of a tubular segment can be determined by its length, LB and its approximate radius, RB along its centerline, where the centerline length is .intg..sub.Cds. FIG. 6(b) illustrates the selecting of one centerline for each tubular branch via an example having three points A, B, C on a boundary and their corresponding minimum-cost paths. It is clear that the point B with its path CB represents a branch while the front point A does not since the length of its path is similar to its radius. The front point C may be considered as representing a branch since the length of its minimal path to the source P.sub.0 is significant relative to its average radius. However, the path CB represents the branch better than the path CC starting from C. These observations suggest that a front point with the longest path represents a branch better when there are several front points on the same boundary, which is the case after stopping the propagation. Thus, the centerlines starting from A and C are removed while the centerline from B is kept.
[0048] A branch removal process according to an embodiment of the invention can be efficiently implemented with the following algorithm, illustrated in the flowchart of FIG. 12.
[0049] 1. Find, at step 120, a path in the image from a starting point to every other point P.sub.i in the tubular structure that minimizes the aforementioned accumulative cost function.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Sturm invention according to the teaching of Gulsun because to combine “the similarity measure may be based on distances between points along both pathways, based on the curvature”, that is taught by the Sturm invention according to the teaching with Gulsun that “finding a path in the image between a starting point and every other point in the tubular structure that it cost function”, would provide for measuring the similarity between a intravascular image and a non-invasive image and it’s pathway using a cost function.
With regard to claims 3, 11, 12 and 16 the arguments analogous to those presented above for claims 1 and 2, are respectively applicable to claims 3, 11, 12 and 16.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 5, 9, 13, 14 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Seyed Azarian whose telephone number is (571) 272-7443. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Thursday from 6:00 a.m. to 7:30 p.m.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Matthew Bella, can be reached at (571) 272-7778. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published application may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR.
Status information about the PAIR system, see http:// pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/SEYED H AZARIAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2667
July 10, 2026
Prosecution Insights