ArticleExperimental mechanics2022
Alumina as a Computed Tomography Soft Material and Tissue Fiducial Marker.
Article in Experimental mechanics, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: The use of 3D imaging is becoming increasingly common, so too is the use of fiducial markers to identify/track regions of interest and assess material deformation. While many different materials have been used as fiducials, they are often used in isolation, with little comparison to one another. Objective: In the current study, we aim to directly compare different Computed Tomography (CT and μCT) fiducial materials, both metallic and nonmetallic. Methods: μCT imaging was performed on a soft-tissue structure, in this case heart valve tissue, with various markers attached. Additionally, we evaluated the same markers with DiceCT stained tissue in a fluid medium. Eight marker materials were tested in all. Results: All of the metallic markers generated significant artifacts and were found unsuitable for soft-tissue μCT imaging, whereas alumina markers were found to perform the best, with excellent contrast and consistency. Conclusions: These findings support the further use of alumina as fiducial markers for soft material and tissue studies that utilize CT and μCT imaging.
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.