Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32445126›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2020

Biomechanical modelling of probe to tissue interaction during ultrasound scanning.

Eleonora Tagliabue, Diego Dall'Alba, Enrico Magnabosco, Igor Peterlik, Paolo Fiorini

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Concepts and Trends n Autonomy for Robot-Assisted Surgery.Proceedings of the IEEE. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers · 2022
    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

5 authors.

Eleonora TagliabueDepartment of Computer Science, University of Verona, Str. le Grazie 15, Verona, Italy. eleonora.tagliabue@univr.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1536-2293
Diego Dall'AlbaDepartment of Computer Science, University of Verona, Str. le Grazie 15, Verona, Italy.
Enrico MagnaboscoDepartment of Computer Science, University of Verona, Str. le Grazie 15, Verona, Italy.
Igor PeterlikINRIA, Strasbourg, France.
Paolo FioriniDepartment of Computer Science, University of Verona, Str. le Grazie 15, Verona, Italy.

Funding

H2020 European Research Council 742671Horizon 2020 688188
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeBiomechanical simulation of anatomical deformations caused by ultrasound probe pressure is of outstanding importance for several applications, from the testing of robotic acquisition systems to multi-modal image fusion and development of ultrasound training platforms. Different approaches can be exploited for modelling the probe-tissue interaction, each achieving different trade-offs among accuracy, computation time and stability.

methodsWe assess the performances of different strategies based on the finite element method for modelling the interaction between the rigid probe and soft tissues. Probe-tissue contact is modelled using (i) penalty forces, (ii) constraint forces, and (iii) by prescribing the displacement of the mesh surface nodes. These methods are tested in the challenging context of ultrasound scanning of the breast, an organ undergoing large nonlinear deformations during the procedure.

resultsThe obtained results are evaluated against those of a non-physically based method. While all methods achieve similar accuracy, performance in terms of stability and speed shows high variability, especially for those methods modelling the contacts explicitly. Overall, prescribing surface displacements is the approach with best performances, but it requires prior knowledge of the contact area and probe trajectory.

conclusionsIn this work, we present different strategies for modelling probe-tissue interaction, each able to achieve different compromises among accuracy, speed and stability. The choice of the preferred approach highly depends on the requirements of the specific clinical application. Since the presented methodologies can be applied to describe general tool-tissue interactions, this work can be seen as a reference for researchers seeking the most appropriate strategy to model anatomical deformation induced by the interaction with medical tools.

Indexed as

Models, AnatomicBiomechanical PhenomenaComputer SimulationHumansUltrasonographyBiomechanical simulationBreast ultrasoundProbe–tissue interactionUltrasound scanning

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.