ArticleIEEE transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control2022
Improving Transcranial Acoustic Targeting: The Limits of CT-Based Velocity Estimates and the Role of MR.
Article in IEEE transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- A novel method for acoustic modeling of cranial bone based on the porosity index.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The speed of sound in skull-mimicking digital phantoms depends on the microstructure.Physics in medicine and biology · 2025Article
- Influence of bone microstructure on ultrasound loss through skull-mimicking digital phantoms.Medical physics · 2025Article
- A Physiological Marker for Deep Brain Ultrasonic Neuromodulation.Neuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society · 2025Article
- Model-based navigation of transcranial focused ultrasound neuromodulation in humans: Application to targeting the amygdala and thalamus.Brain stimulationArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Transcranial magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound (tcMRgFUS) enables the noninvasive treatment of the deep brain. This capacity relies on the ability to focus acoustic energy through the in-tact skull, a feat that requires accurate estimates of the acoustic velocity in individual patient skulls. In current practice, these estimates are generated using a pretreatment computed tomography (CT) scan and then registered to a magnetic resonance (MR) dataset on the day of the treatment. Treatment safety and efficacy can be improved by eliminating the need to register the CT data to the MR images and by improving the accuracy of acoustic velocity measurements. In this study, we examine the capacity of MR to supplement or replace CT as a means of estimating velocity in the skull. We find that MR can predict velocity with less but comparable accuracy to CT. We then use micro-CT imaging to better understand the limitations of Hounsfield unit (HU)-based estimates of velocity, demonstrating that the macrostructure of pores in the skull contributes to the acoustic velocity of the bone. We find evidence that detailed T2 measurements provide information about pore macrostructure similar to the information obtained with micro-CT, offering a potential clinical mechanism for improving patient-specific estimates of acoustic velocity in the human skull.
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.