ArticlePloS one2019
In vivo ultrasound thermal ablation control using echo decorrelation imaging in rabbit liver and VX2 tumor.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Real-time control of radiofrequency ablation using three-dimensional ultrasound echo decorrelation imaging in normal and diseasedPhysics in medicine and biology · 2025Article
- Three-dimensional echo decorrelation monitoring of radiofrequency ablation in ex vivo bovine liver.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2022Article
- Phosphotungstate Acid Doped Polyanilines Nanorods for in situ NIR-II Photothermal Therapy of Orthotopic Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Rabbit.International journal of nanomedicine · 2022Article
- Effect of Overpressure on Acoustic Emissions and Treated Tissue Histology in ex Vivo Bulk Ultrasound Ablation.Ultrasound in medicine & biology · 2021Article
- Numerical analysis of three-dimensional echo decorrelation imaging.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 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
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The utility of echo decorrelation imaging feedback for real-time control of in vivo ultrasound thermal ablation was assessed in rabbit liver with VX2 tumor. High-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) and unfocused (bulk) ablation were performed using 5 MHz linear image-ablate arrays. Treatments comprised up to nine lower-power sonications, followed by up to nine higher-power sonications, ceasing when the average cumulative echo decorrelation within a control region of interest exceeded a predefined threshold (- 2.3, log10-scaled echo decorrelation per millisecond, corresponding to 90% specificity for tumor ablation prediction in previous in vivo experiments). This threshold was exceeded in all cases for both HIFU (N = 12) and bulk (N = 8) ablation. Controlled HIFU trials achieved a significantly higher average ablation rate compared to comparable ablation trials without image-based control, reported previously. Both controlled HIFU and bulk ablation trials required significantly less treatment time than these previous uncontrolled trials. Prediction of local liver and VX2 tumor ablation using echo decorrelation was tested using receiver operator characteristic curve analysis, showing prediction capability statistically equivalent to uncontrolled trials. Compared to uncontrolled trials, controlled trials resulted in smaller thermal ablation regions and higher contrast between echo decorrelation in treated vs. untreated regions. These results indicate that control using echo decorrelation imaging may reduce treatment duration and increase treatment reliability for in vivo thermal ablation.
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.