Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33410183›Full record

ArticleJournal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine2021

Radiological Society of North America/Quantitative Imaging Biomarker Alliance Shear Wave Speed Bias Quantification in Elastic and Viscoelastic Phantoms.

Mark L Palmeri, Andy Milkowski, Richard Barr, Paul Carson, Mathieu Couade, Jun Chen, Shigao Chen, Manish Dhyani, Richard Ehman, Brian Garra and 34 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06097338 (Quantitative US for Evaluation of Hepatic Steatosis in MAFLD With UDFF), which is not on this map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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.

NCT06097338 not yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Quantitative US for Evaluation of Hepatic Steatosis in MAFLD With UDFF

TypeobservationalSponsorQianfoshan HospitalRan2023 to 2026Enrolled200ConditionsFatty Liver Disease, NonalcoholicArmsbariatric surgery (BS)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Clinical, Safety, and Engineering Perspectives on Wearable Ultrasound Technology: A Review.IEEE transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Liver fibrosis assessment: MR and US elastography.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2022
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

44 authors.

Mark L PalmeriDuke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8995-0050
Andy MilkowskiSiemens Medical Solutions, Issaquah, Washington, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4349-2899
Richard BarrThe Surgical Hospital at Southwoods, Boardman, Ohio, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8021-0072
Paul CarsonUniversity of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3543-7424
Mathieu CouadeSuperSonic Imagine, Aix-en-Provence, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4040-0933
Jun ChenMayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Shigao ChenMayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Manish DhyaniMassachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2651-1859
Richard EhmanMayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7041-5074
Brian GarraUS Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
Albert GeeZonare Medical Systems, Mountain View, California, USA.
Gilles GuenetteToshiba Medical Research Institute, Redmond, Washington, USA.
Zaegyoo HahSamsung Medison, Seoul, South Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4493-5580
Ted LynchCIRS, Inc, Norfolk, Virginia, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1800-431X
Michael MacdonaldGE Healthcare, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9000-9388
Ravi ManaguliHitachi Healthcare, Twinsburg, Ohio, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3760-7434
Veronique MietteEchosens, Paris, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7446-7509
Kathryn R NightingaleDuke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0960-4495
Nancy ObuchowskiThe Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1891-7477
Ned C RouzeDuke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2154-2434
D Cody MorrisDuke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0963-841X
Shana FieldingDuke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Yufeng DengDuke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2153-8494
Derek ChanDuke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1816-5455
Kingshuk ChoudhuryDuke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0306-2915
Siyun YangDuke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Anthony E SamirMassachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7801-8724
Vijay ShamdasaniPhilips Research, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Matthew UrbanMayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1360-4287
Keith WearUS Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0318-4821
Hua XiePhilips Research, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Arinc OzturkMassachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5335-3737
Bo QiangMayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Pengfei SongMayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9103-6345
Stephen McAleaveyUniversity of Rochester, Rochester, New York, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3153-9060
Stephen RosenzweigSiemens Medical Solutions, Issaquah, Washington, USA.
Michael WangGE Healthcare, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.
Yoko OkamuraCanon Medical Systems Corp, Otawara, Japan.
Glen McLaughlinZonare Medical Systems, Mountain View, California, USA.
Yuling ChenZonare Medical Systems, Mountain View, California, USA.
David NapolitanoZonare Medical Systems, Mountain View, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1474-090X
Lindsey CarlsonUniversity of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7940-1373
Todd ErpeldingCanon Medical Systems Corp, Otawara, Japan.
Timothy J HallUniversity of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9850-6031

Funding

Measurement of Renal Viscoelastic Properties with UltrasoundR01DK092255 · NIDDK · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI URBAN, MATTHEW WILLIAM · 2012 to 2022
$5.2M
REMOTE PALPATION IMAGING IN THE BREASTR01EB002132 · NIBIB · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI NIGHTINGALE, KATHRYN RADABAUGH · 2003 to 2015
$4.9M
Magnetic Resonance ElastographyR37EB001981 · NIBIB · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI EHMAN, RICHARD L. · 2016 to 2025
$4.0M
Magnetic Resonance ElastographyR01EB001981 · NIBIB · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI EHMAN, RICHARD L. · 2003 to 2013
$3.1M
Ultrasound Elastography for Liver Fibrosis StagingR01DK106957 · NIDDK · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI CHEN, SHIGAO, GREENLEAF, JAMES FOWLER · 2015 to 2018
$1.8M
FDA HHSNHLBI NIH HHS HHSN268201500021CNIBIB NIH HHS HHSN268201000050CNIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB001981NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB002132NIBIB NIH HHS R37 EB001981NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK092255NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK106957NIH HHS HHSN268201000050CNIH HHS HHSN268201500021CNIH HHS R01DK092255NIH HHS R01DK106957NIH HHS R01EB001981NIH HHS R01EB002132the Radiological Society of North America
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo quantify the bias of shear wave speed (SWS) measurements between different commercial ultrasonic shear elasticity systems and a magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) system in elastic and viscoelastic phantoms.

methodsTwo elastic phantoms, representing healthy through fibrotic liver, were measured with 5 different ultrasound platforms, and 3 viscoelastic phantoms, representing healthy through fibrotic liver tissue, were measured with 12 different ultrasound platforms. Measurements were performed with different systems at different sites, at 3 focal depths, and with different appraisers. The SWS bias across the systems was quantified as a function of the system, site, focal depth, and appraiser. A single MRE research system was also used to characterize these phantoms using discrete frequencies from 60 to 500 Hz.

resultsThe SWS from different systems had mean difference 95% confidence intervals of ±0.145 m/s (±9.6%) across both elastic phantoms and ± 0.340 m/s (±15.3%) across the viscoelastic phantoms. The focal depth and appraiser were less significant sources of SWS variability than the system and site. Magnetic resonance elastography best matched the ultrasonic SWS in the viscoelastic phantoms using a 140 Hz source but had a - 0.27 ± 0.027-m/s (-12.2% ± 1.2%) bias when using the clinically implemented 60-Hz vibration source.

conclusionsShear wave speed reconstruction across different manufacturer systems is more consistent in elastic than viscoelastic phantoms, with a mean difference bias of < ±10% in all cases. Magnetic resonance elastographic measurements in the elastic and viscoelastic phantoms best match the ultrasound systems with a 140-Hz excitation but have a significant negative bias operating at 60 Hz. This study establishes a foundation for meaningful comparison of SWS measurements made with different platforms.

Indexed as

Elasticity Imaging TechniquesBiomarkersElasticityHumansNorth AmericaPhantoms, ImagingBiomarkersacoustic radiation forceelasticityphantomQuantitative Imaging Biomarker Allianceshear waveviscoelasticity

Identifiers

PMID33410183
PMCPMC8082942

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

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.