ArticlePhotoacoustics2018
Rapid scanning wide-field clutter elimination in epi-optoacoustic imaging using comb LOVIT.
Article in Photoacoustics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The confounding effects of skin colour in photoacoustic imaging.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Performance evaluation of mesoscopic photoacoustic imaging.Photoacoustics · 2023Article
- Suppression of acoustic reflection artifact in endoscopic photoacoustic tomographic images based on approximation of ideal signals.Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine · 2022Article
- Review of consensus test methods in medical imaging and current practices in photoacoustic image quality assessment.Journal of biomedical optics · 2021Review
- Three-dimensional view of out-of-plane artifacts in photoacoustic imaging using a laser-integrated linear-transducer-array probe.Photoacoustics · 2020Article
- Reducing artifacts in photoacoustic imaging by using multi-wavelength excitation and transducer displacement.Biomedical optics express · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Epi-style optoacoustic (OA) imaging provides flexibility by integrating the irradiation optics and ultrasound receiver, yet clutter generated by optical absorption near the probe obscures deep OA sources. Localised vibration tagging (LOVIT) retrieves OA signal from images that are acquired with and without a preceding ultrasonic pushing beam: Radiation force leads to a phase shift of signals coming from the focal area resulting in their visibility in a difference image, whereas clutter from outside the pushing beam is eliminated. Disadvantages of a single-focus approach are residual clutter from inside the pushing beam above the focus, and time-intensive scanning of the focus to retrieve a large field-of-view. To speed up acquisition, we propose to create multiple foci in parallel, forming comb-shaped ARF patterns. By subtracting OA images obtained with interleaved combs, this technique moreover results in greatly improved clutter reduction in phantoms mimicking optical, acoustic and elastic properties of breast tissue.
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.