Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38174105›Full record

ArticlePhotoacoustics2023

Ultrasound-guided needle tracking with deep learning: A novel approach with photoacoustic ground truth.

Xie Hui, Praveenbalaji Rajendran, Tong Ling, Xianjin Dai, Lei Xing, Manojit Pramanik

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Photoacoustics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Tracking performance and surgeon assessment of photoacoustic-based surgical guidance methods.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Real-Time In Vivo Cellular-Level Imaging During Puncture.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

6 authors.

Xie HuiSchool of Chemistry, Chemical Engineering and Biotechnology, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 637459, Singapore.
Praveenbalaji RajendranStanford University, Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford, California 94305, United States.
Tong LingSchool of Chemistry, Chemical Engineering and Biotechnology, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 637459, Singapore.
Xianjin DaiStanford University, Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford, California 94305, United States.
Lei XingStanford University, Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford, California 94305, United States.
Manojit PramanikDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate needle guidance is crucial for safe and effective clinical diagnosis and treatment procedures. Conventional ultrasound (US)-guided needle insertion often encounters challenges in consistency and precisely visualizing the needle, necessitating the development of reliable methods to track the needle. As a powerful tool in image processing, deep learning has shown promise for enhancing needle visibility in US images, although its dependence on manual annotation or simulated data as ground truth can lead to potential bias or difficulties in generalizing to real US images. Photoacoustic (PA) imaging has demonstrated its capability for high-contrast needle visualization. In this study, we explore the potential of PA imaging as a reliable ground truth for deep learning network training without the need for expert annotation. Our network (UIU-Net), trained on ex vivo tissue image datasets, has shown remarkable precision in localizing needles within US images. The evaluation of needle segmentation performance extends across previously unseen ex vivo data and in vivo human data (collected from an open-source data repository). Specifically, for human data, the Modified Hausdorff Distance (MHD) value stands at approximately 3.73, and the targeting error value is around 2.03, indicating the strong similarity and small needle orientation deviation between the predicted needle and actual needle location. A key advantage of our method is its applicability beyond US images captured from specific imaging systems, extending to images from other US imaging systems.

Indexed as

Deep learningNeedle trackingPhotoacoustic imagingUltrasound imaging

Identifiers

PMID38174105
PMCPMC10761306

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.