Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35308306›Full record

ArticlePhotoacoustics2022

Image processing improvements afford second-generation handheld optoacoustic imaging of breast cancer patients.

Jan Kukačka, Stephan Metz, Christoph Dehner, Alexander Muckenhuber, Korbinian Paul-Yuan, Angelos Karlas, Eva Maria Fallenberg, Ernst Rummeny, Dominik Jüstel, Vasilis Ntziachristos

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Photoacoustics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Advances in Photoacoustic Imaging of Breast Cancer.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. A novel maternal thyroid disease prediction using multi-scale vision transformer architecture with improved linguistic hedges neural-fuzzy classifier.Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

10 authors.

Jan KukačkaHelmholtz Zentrum München (GmbH), Institute of Biological and Medical Imaging, Neuherberg, Germany.
Stephan MetzTechnical University of Munich, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Munich, Germany.
Christoph DehnerHelmholtz Zentrum München (GmbH), Institute of Biological and Medical Imaging, Neuherberg, Germany.
Alexander MuckenhuberTechnical University of Munich, Institute of General and Surgical Pathology, Munich, Germany.
Korbinian Paul-YuanHelmholtz Zentrum München (GmbH), Institute of Biological and Medical Imaging, Neuherberg, Germany.
Angelos KarlasHelmholtz Zentrum München (GmbH), Institute of Biological and Medical Imaging, Neuherberg, Germany.
Eva Maria FallenbergTechnical University of Munich, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Munich, Germany.
Ernst RummenyTechnical University of Munich, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Munich, Germany.
Dominik JüstelHelmholtz Zentrum München (GmbH), Institute of Biological and Medical Imaging, Neuherberg, Germany.
Vasilis NtziachristosHelmholtz Zentrum München (GmbH), Institute of Biological and Medical Imaging, Neuherberg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Since the initial breast transillumination almost a century ago, breast cancer imaging using light has been considered in different implementations aiming to improve diagnostics, minimize the number of available biopsies, or monitor treatment. However, due to strong photon scattering, conventional optical imaging yields low resolution images, challenging quantification and interpretation. Optoacoustic imaging addresses the scattering limitation and yields high-resolution visualization of optical contrast, offering great potential value for breast cancer imaging. Nevertheless, the image quality of experimental systems remains limited due to a number of factors, including signal attenuation with depth and partial view angle and motion effects, particularly in multi-wavelength measurements. Methods: We developed data analytics methods to improve the accuracy of handheld optoacoustic breast cancer imaging, yielding second-generation optoacoustic imaging performance operating in tandem with ultrasonography. Results: We produced the most advanced images yet with handheld optoacoustic examinations of the human breast and breast cancer, in terms of resolution and contrast. Using these advances, we examined optoacoustic markers of malignancy, including vasculature abnormalities, hypoxia, and inflammation, on images obtained from breast cancer patients. Conclusions: We achieved a new level of quality for optoacoustic images from a handheld examination of the human breast, advancing the diagnostic and theranostic potential of the hybrid optoacoustic-ultrasound (OPUS) examination over routine ultrasonography.

Indexed as

2G-OPUS, 2nd generation Multispectral Optoacoustic-Ultrasound TomographyBreast cancerCNR, Contrast-to-noise ratioDCIS, Ductal carcinoma in situFOV, Field of viewFWHM, Full width at half maximumILC, Invasive lobular carcinomaImage quality enhancementIn vivo imagingLCO, Lower cut-offMSOT, Multispectral Optoacoustic TomographyMultispectral optoacoustic tomographyNAT, Neoadjuvant chemotherapyNST, No special typeOA, OptoacousticsSoS, Speed-of-soundTIR, Total impulse responseTumor-associated microvasculatureUltrasoundUS, Ultrasound

Identifiers

PMID35308306
PMCPMC8931444

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.