Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29422328›Full record

ArticleUltrasound in medicine & biology2018

Impact of Acoustic Radiation Force Excitation Geometry on Shear Wave Dispersion and Attenuation Estimates.

Samantha L Lipman, Ned C Rouze, Mark L Palmeri, Kathryn R Nightingale

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ultrasound in medicine & biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Imaging the Local Nonlinear Viscoelastic Properties of Soft Tissues: Initial Validation and Expected Benefits.IEEE transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Characterization of Viscoelastic Materials Using Group Shear Wave Speeds.IEEE transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control · 2018
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Samantha L LipmanDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA. Electronic address: samantha.lipman@duke.edu.
Ned C RouzeDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Mark L PalmeriDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Kathryn R NightingaleDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.

Funding

REMOTE PALPATION IMAGING IN THE BREASTR01EB002132 · NIBIB · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI NIGHTINGALE, KATHRYN RADABAUGH · 2003 to 2015
$4.9M
Improved ultrasound imaging using elevated acoustic outputR01EB022106 · NIBIB · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI NIGHTINGALE, KATHRYN RADABAUGH · 2016 to 2019
$1.8M
Data commons for 'omic, microscopy and analysis core facilitiesS10OD018164 · OD · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI WRAY, GREGORY A. · 2014 to 2014
$598k
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB002132NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB022106NIH HHS S10 OD018164
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Shear wave elasticity imaging (SWEI) characterizes the mechanical properties of human tissues to differentiate healthy from diseased tissue. Commercial scanners tend to reconstruct shear wave speeds for a region of interest using time-of-flight methods reporting a single shear wave speed (or elastic modulus) to the end user under the assumptions that tissue is elastic and shear wave speeds are not dependent on the frequency content of the shear waves. Human tissues, however, are known to be viscoelastic, resulting in dispersion and attenuation. Shear wave spectroscopy and spectral methods have been previously reported in the literature to quantify shear wave dispersion and attenuation, commonly making an assumption that the acoustic radiation force excitation acts as a cylindrical source with a known geometric shear wave amplitude decay. This work quantifies the bias in shear dispersion and attenuation estimates associated with making this cylindrical wave assumption when applied to shear wave sources with finite depth extents, as commonly occurs with realistic focal geometries, in elastic and viscoelastic media. Bias is quantified using analytically derived shear wave data and shear wave data generated using finite-element method models. Shear wave dispersion and attenuation bias (up to 15% for dispersion and 41% for attenuation) is greater for more tightly focused acoustic radiation force sources with smaller depths of field relative to their lateral extent (height-to-width ratios <16). Dispersion and attenuation errors associated with assuming a cylindrical geometric shear wave decay in SWEI can be appreciable and should be considered when analyzing the viscoelastic properties of tissues with acoustic radiation force source distributions with limited depths of field.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsElasticity Imaging TechniquesModels, BiologicalDispersionShear attenuationShear wave imagingViscoelastic materials

Identifiers

PMID29422328
PMCPMC6260799

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.