Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35381121›Full record

ArticleMagnetic resonance in medicine2022

Impact of material homogeneity assumption on cortical stiffness estimates by MR elastography.

Jonathan M Scott, KowsalyaDevi Pavuluri, Joshua D Trzasko, Armando Manduca, Matthew L Senjem, John Huston, Richard L Ehman, Matthew C Murphy

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Magnetic resonance in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Stiffness analysis of meningiomas using neural network-based inversion on MR Elastography.Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jonathan M ScottMayo Clinic Medical Scientist Training Program, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5958-9698
KowsalyaDevi PavuluriDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Joshua D TrzaskoDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Armando ManducaDepartment of Physiology and Biomedical Engineering, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9411-5671
Matthew L SenjemDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
John HustonDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Richard L EhmanDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Matthew C MurphyDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Mayo Clinic · USMayo Clinic in Florida · US

Funding

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
Advanced preoperative assessment of meningiomasR01EB027064 · NIBIB · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI MURPHY, MATTHEW CHRISTOPHER · 2019 to 2022
$1.4M
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB001981NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB027064NIBIB NIH HHS R37 EB001981
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeInversion algorithms used to convert acquired MR elastography wave data into material property estimates often assume that the underlying materials are locally homogeneous. Here we evaluate the impact of that assumption on stiffness estimates in gray-matter regions of interest in brain MR elastography.

methodsWe describe an updated neural network inversion framework using finite-difference model-derived data to train convolutional neural network inversion algorithms. Neural network inversions trained on homogeneous simulations (homogeneous learned inversions [HLIs]) or inhomogeneous simulations (inhomogeneous learned inversions [ILIs]) are generated with a variety of kernel sizes. These inversions are evaluated in a brain MR elastography simulation experiment and in vivo in a test-retest repeatability experiment including 10 healthy volunteers.

resultsIn simulation and in vivo, HLI and ILI with small kernels produce similar results. As kernel size increases, the assumption of homogeneity has a larger effect, and HLI and ILI stiffness estimates show larger differences. At each inversion's optimal kernel size in simulation (7 × 7 × 7 for HLI, 11 × 11 × 11 for ILI), ILI is more sensitive to true changes in stiffness in gray-matter regions of interest in simulation. In vivo, there is no difference in the region-level repeatability of stiffness estimates between the inversions, although ILI appears to better maintain the stiffness map structure as kernel size increases, while decreasing the spatial variance in stiffness estimates.

conclusionsThis study suggests that inhomogeneous inversions provide small but significant benefits even when large stiffness gradients are absent.

Indexed as

Elasticity Imaging TechniquesAlgorithmsBrainGray MatterHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingNeural Networks, Computerartificial neural networksbrain stiffnessinversionmagnetic resonance elastography

Identifiers

PMID35381121
PMCPMC9561798
OpenAlexW4224050812

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.