Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32744524›Full record

ArticleJournal of visualized experiments : JoVE2020

Patient-Specific Polyvinyl Alcohol Phantom Fabrication with Ultrasound and X-Ray Contrast for Brain Tumor Surgery Planning.

Eleanor C Mackle, Jonathan Shapey, Efthymios Maneas, Shakeel R Saeed, Robert Bradford, Sebastien Ourselin, Tom Vercauteren, Adrien E Desjardins

Abstract readVideo-Audio Media
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE, 2020. 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. Review
  2. Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

8 authors.

Eleanor C Mackle *Wellcome / EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences, University College London; Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London; eleanor.mackle.14@ucl.ac.uk.
Jonathan Shapey *Wellcome / EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences, University College London; Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London; Department of Neurosurgery, National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery; School of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London.
Efthymios ManeasWellcome / EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences, University College London; Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London.
Shakeel R SaeedDepartment of Neurosurgery, National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery; The Ear Institute, University College London; The Royal National Throat, Nose and Ear Hospital, London.
Robert BradfordDepartment of Neurosurgery, National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery.
Sebastien OurselinSchool of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London.
Tom VercauterenSchool of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London.
Adrien E DesjardinsWellcome / EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences, University College London; Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_PC_17180Wellcome Trust 101957Wellcome Trust 203145Wellcome Trust 203145Z/16/ZWellcome Trust 203148/Z/16/ZWellcome Trust WT106882
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Phantoms are essential tools for clinical training, surgical planning and the development of novel medical devices. However, it is challenging to create anatomically accurate head phantoms with realistic brain imaging properties because standard fabrication methods are not optimized to replicate any patient-specific anatomical detail and 3D printing materials are not optimized for imaging properties. In order to test and validate a novel navigation system for use during brain tumor surgery, an anatomically accurate phantom with realistic imaging and mechanical properties was required. Therefore, a phantom was developed using real patient data as input and 3D printing of molds to fabricate a patient-specific head phantom comprising the skull, brain and tumor with both ultrasound and X-ray contrast. The phantom also had mechanical properties that allowed the phantom tissue to be manipulated in a similar manner to how human brain tissue is handled during surgery. The phantom was successfully tested during a surgical simulation in a virtual operating room. The phantom fabrication method uses commercially available materials and is easy to reproduce. The 3D printing files can be readily shared, and the technique can be adapted to encompass many different types of tumor.

Indexed as

Phantoms, ImagingPolyvinyl AlcoholBrain NeoplasmsHumansPrinting, Three-DimensionalSurgery, Computer-AssistedTomography, X-Ray ComputedUltrasonographyPolyvinyl Alcohol

Identifiers

PMID32744524
PMCPMC7610642

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.