ArticleThe international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS2020
Focused ultrasound robotic system for very small bore magnetic resonance imaging.
Article in The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Novel Marker-Based Registration Method for Simultaneous Preclinical PET/MR with a Non-Stationary PET Detector.Research square · 2026Article
- Robotic device for transcranial focussed ultrasound applications in small animal models.The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS · 2022Article
- Impact of Three-dimensional-printed Skull Inserts of Different Thickness on Magnetic Resonance-guided Focused Ultrasound Heating in a Head Phantom.Journal of medical ultrasoundArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) compatible robotic system for focused ultrasound was developed for small animal like mice or rats that fits into a 9.4 T MRI scanner (Bruker Biospec 9420, Bruker Biospin, Ettlingen, Germany). The robotic system includes two computer-controlled linear stages. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe robotic system was evaluated in a mouse-shaped, real-size agar-based mimicking material, which has similar acoustical properties as soft tissues. The agar content was 6% weight per volume (w/v), 4% w/v silica while the rest was degassed water. The transducer used has a diameter of 4 cm, operates with 2.6 MHz and focuses energy at 5 cm.
resultsThe MRI compatibility of the robotic system was evaluated in a 9.4 T small animal scanner. The efficacy of the ultrasonic transducer was evaluated in the mimicking material using temperature measurements.
conclusionsThe proposed robotic system can be utilized in a 9.4 T small animal MRI scanner. The proposed system is functional, compact and simple thus providing a useful tool for preclinical research in mice and rats.
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.