ArticleLa Radiologia medica2018
Feasibility of intraoral ultrasonography in the diagnosis of oral soft tissue lesions: a preclinical assessment on an ex vivo specimen.
Article in La Radiologia medica, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Wearable Ultrasound Sensing System for Soft Tissue Stiffness Detection: A Feasibility Study.Biosensors · 2025Article
- Imaging the Micron: New Directions in Diagnosis with Ultra-High-Frequency Ultrasound.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- The Reliability of Ultrasonographic Assessment of Depth of Invasion: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Identification of oral cancer in OCT images based on an optical attenuation model.Lasers in medical science · 2020Article
- Ultra-high frequency ultrasound (UHFUS) applications in Sjogren syndrome: narrative review and current concepts.Gland surgery · 2020Review
- Narrative review of multiparametric ultrasound in parotid gland evaluation.Gland surgery · 2020Review
- Ultrasonography of sudden swollen tongue in a calf.BMC veterinary research · 2020Article
- Non-invasive intravital observation of lingual surface features using sliding oral mucoscopy techniques in clinically healthy subjects.Odontology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe early detection of oral soft tissue lesions is an important prognostic factor, and the possibility of using ultrasonography (US) as a diagnostic tool may improve the diagnosis and characterization of tissue alterations at an early stage. This study aims to evaluate the feasibility of intraoral US by performing a preclinical assessment of an ex vivo specimen in which focal lesions were simulated. MATERIALS AND
methodsFourteen lesions were simulated on a freshly extracted calf tongue, by introducing in the tongue different materials mimicking the appearance of various focal lesions. The specimen was scanned with a 8 MHz US probe and computed tomography (CT) was performed to compare the two imaging techniques. Later, the specimen was dissected to set a benchmark for size assessment.
resultsUS was able to identify all the simulated lesions within the tongue, resulting in one case more accurate than CT. Statistical analysis demonstrated high correlation between the measurements of the simulated lesions performed on the US images and the real size of the materials introduced in the tongue (p < 0.05).
conclusionsThis preclinical study proves that US performs well in the detection and characterization of simulated lesions of the tongue. These findings suggest that US could be effectively used in clinical applications. However, further research is mandatory to assess the reliability of in vivo US in the detection and characterization of tongue lesions as well as of other oral soft tissue alterations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28948476What 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.