ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2024
Design consideration on integration of mechanical intravascular ultrasound and electromagnetic tracking sensor for intravascular reconstruction.
Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2024. 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeConsidering vessel deformation, endovascular navigation requires intraoperative geometric information. Mechanical intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) with an electromagnetic (EM) sensor can be used to reconstruct blood vessels with thin diameter. However, the integration design should be evaluated based on the factors affecting the reconstruction error.
methodsThe interference between the mechanical IVUS and EM sensor was measured in different relative positions. Two designs of the integrated catheter were evaluated by measuring the reconstruction errors using a rigid vascular phantom.
resultsWhen the distance from the EM sensor to the field generator was 75 mm, the interference from mechanical IVUS to an EM sensor was negligible, with position and rotation errors less than 0.1 mm and 0.6°, respectively. The reconstructed vessel model for proximal IVUS transducer had a smooth surface but an inaccurate shape at large curvature of the vascular phantom. When the distance to the field generator was 175 mm, the error increased significantly.
conclusionPlacing the IVUS transducer on the proximal side of the EM sensor is superior in terms of interference reduction but inferior in terms of mechanical stability compared to a distal transducer. The distal side is preferred due to better mechanical stability during catheter manipulation at larger curvature. With this configuration, surface reconstruction errors less than 1.7 mm (with RMS 0.57 mm) were achieved when the distance to the field generator was less than 175 mm.
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.