ArticleMedical & biological engineering & computing2018
Varying ultrasound power level to distinguish surgical instruments and tissue.
Article in Medical & biological engineering & computing, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Capsule robot pose and mechanism state detection in ultrasound using attention-based hierarchical deep learning.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Optically-guided instrument for transapical beating-heart delivery of artificial mitral chordae tendineae.The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2019Article
- Dispersion characterization of magnetic actuated needleless injections with particle image velocimetry.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2019Article
- High dynamic range ultrasound imaging.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
We investigate a new framework of surgical instrument detection based on power-varying ultrasound images with simple and efficient pixel-wise intensity processing. Without using complicated feature extraction methods, we identified the instrument with an estimated optimal power level and by comparing pixel values of varying transducer power level images. The proposed framework exploits the physics of ultrasound imaging system by varying the transducer power level to effectively distinguish metallic surgical instruments from tissue. This power-varying image-guidance is motivated from our observations that ultrasound imaging at different power levels exhibit different contrast enhancement capabilities between tissue and instruments in ultrasound-guided robotic beating-heart surgery. Using lower transducer power levels (ranging from 40 to 75% of the rated lowest ultrasound power levels of the two tested ultrasound scanners) can effectively suppress the strong imaging artifacts from metallic instruments and thus, can be utilized together with the images from normal transducer power levels to enhance the separability between instrument and tissue, improving intraoperative instrument tracking accuracy from the acquired noisy ultrasound volumetric images. We performed experiments in phantoms and ex vivo hearts in water tank environments. The proposed multi-level power-varying ultrasound imaging approach can identify robotic instruments of high acoustic impedance from low-signal-to-noise-ratio ultrasound images by power adjustments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.