ArticleThe Review of scientific instruments2019
A model study of 3-dimensional localization of breast tumors using piezoelectric fingers of different probe sizes.
Article in The Review of scientific instruments, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
Mammography is the only Food and Drug Administration approved breast cancer screening method. The drawback of the tumor image in a mammogram is the lack of tumor depth information as it is only a 2-dimensional projection of a 3-dimensional (3D) tumor. In this work, we investigated 3D tumor imaging by assessing tumor depth information using a set of piezoelectric fingers (PEFs) with different probe sizes which were known to be capable of eliciting tissue elastic responses to different depths and tested it on model tumor tissues consisted of gelatin with suspended clay inclusions. The locations of the top and bottom surfaces of an inclusion were resolved by solving a simple spring model using the elastic measurements of the PEFs of different probe sizes as the input. The lateral sizes of an inclusion were determined as the full width at half maximum of the Gaussian fit to the measured lateral tumor elastic modulus profile. The obtained lateral inclusion sizes were in close agreement with the actual values, and the deduced depth profiles of an inclusion also agreed with the actual depth profiles so long as the bottom surface of the inclusion was within the depth sensitivity of the PEF with the largest probe size. This work offers a simple non-invasive method to predict the extent of a tumor in all 3 dimensions. The method is also non-radioactive.
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.