ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2022
Systematic analysis of volumetric ultrasound parameters for markerless 4D motion tracking.
Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesMotion compensation is an interesting approach to improve treatments of moving structures. For example, target motion can substantially affect dose delivery in radiation therapy, where methods to detect and mitigate the motion are widely used. Recent advances in fast, volumetric ultrasound have rekindled the interest in ultrasound for motion tracking. We present a setup to evaluate ultrasound based motion tracking and we study the effect of imaging rate and motion artifacts on its performance.
methodsWe describe an experimental setup to acquire markerless 4D ultrasound data with precise ground truth from a robot and evaluate different real-world trajectories and system settings toward accurate motion estimation. We analyze motion artifacts in continuously acquired data by comparing to data recorded in a step-and-shoot fashion. Furthermore, we investigate the trade-off between the imaging frequency and resolution.
resultsThe mean tracking errors show that continuously acquired data leads to similar results as data acquired in a step-and-shoot fashion. We report mean tracking errors up to 2.01 mm and 1.36 mm on the continuous data for the lower and higher resolution, respectively, while step-and-shoot data leads to mean tracking errors of 2.52 mm and 0.98 mm.
conclusionsWe perform a quantitative analysis of different system settings for motion tracking with 4D ultrasound. We can show that precise tracking is feasible and additional motion in continuously acquired data does not impair the tracking. Moreover, the analysis of the frequency resolution trade-off shows that a high imaging resolution is beneficial in ultrasound tracking.
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.