Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39451367›Full record

ReviewBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Mathematical Models for Ultrasound Elastography: Recent Advances to Improve Accuracy and Clinical Utility.

Ali Farajpour, Wendy V Ingman

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Ali FarajpourAdelaide Medical School, University of Adelaide, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Woodville South, Adelaide, SA 5011, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1114-7393
Wendy V IngmanAdelaide Medical School, University of Adelaide, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Woodville South, Adelaide, SA 5011, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3116-2902

Funding

University of Adelaide Building Research Leaders AwardUniversity of Adelaide Robinson Research Institutes Innovation Seed Funding
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Changes in biomechanical properties such as elasticity modulus, viscosity, and poroelastic features are linked to the health status of biological tissues. Ultrasound elastography is a non-invasive imaging tool that quantitatively maps these biomechanical characteristics for diagnostic and treatment monitoring purposes. Mathematical models are essential in ultrasound elastography as they convert the raw data obtained from tissue displacement caused by ultrasound waves into the images observed by clinicians. This article reviews the available mathematical frameworks of continuum mechanics for extracting the biomechanical characteristics of biological tissues in ultrasound elastography. Continuum-mechanics-based approaches such as classical viscoelasticity, elasticity, and poroelasticity models, as well as nonlocal continuum-based models, are described. The accuracy of ultrasound elastography can be increased with the recent advancements in continuum modelling techniques including hyperelasticity, biphasic theory, nonlocal viscoelasticity, inversion-based elasticity, and incorporating scale effects. However, the time taken to convert the data into clinical images increases with more complex models, and this is a major challenge for expanding the clinical utility of ultrasound elastography. As we strive to provide the most accurate imaging for patients, further research is needed to refine mathematical models for incorporation into the clinical workflow.

Indexed as

biomedical imagingcontinuum modelsdisease diagnosismechanical propertiesultrasound elastography

Identifiers

PMID39451367
PMCPMC11504237

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.