Image Quality Improvement Techniques and Assessment Adequacy in Clinical Optoacoustic Imaging: A Systematic Review.
Image Quality Improvement Techniques and Assessment Adequacy in Clinical Optoacoustic Imaging: A Systematic Review.
复制标题
DOI：
10.3390/bios12100901
复制
发表时间：
2022-10-20
期刊：
影响因子：
5.4
通讯作者：
Hadjileontiadis, Leontios
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Dimaridis, Ioannis;Sridharan, Patmaa;Ntziachristos, Vasilis;Karlas, Angelos;Hadjileontiadis, Leontios
光声成像依赖于光诱导声波的检测，为形态学和功能成像提供了新的可能性。随着该技术走向临床应用的成熟，研究工作旨在解决对图像质量产生负面影响的多因素限制。为了清楚地了解其局限性及其影响，以及这种渐进式改进过程的现状，我们对已经在人体体内进行评估的光声图像质量改进方法进行了广泛的搜索，从而关注临床相关结果。我们查询了6个数据库（PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, IEEE Xplore， ACM Digital Library和b谷歌Scholar）从2010年1月1日至2021年10月31日发表的文章，并通过系统筛选过程确定了45篇相关研究作品。我们回顾了已确定的方法，描述了它们的主要目标、目标限制和关键技术实现细节。此外，考虑到全面和客观的质量评估是在临床实践中采用这些方法的必要前提，我们对45篇论文中的36篇论文进行了进一步深入分析，并得出了一套旨在捕捉关键评估方面的标准。通过比较标准明智的评级过程，我们寻求在其提出的方法的质量评估中表现出色的研究成果，并讨论将它们与具有类似目标的作品区分开来的特征。此外，根据评级结果，我们突出了有改进潜力的领域，并为设计能够提供丰富证据的质量评估管道提取建议。
Optoacoustic imaging relies on the detection of optically induced acoustic waves to offer new possibilities in morphological and functional imaging. As the modality matures towards clinical application, research efforts aim to address multifactorial limitations that negatively impact the resulting image quality. In an endeavor to obtain a clear view on the limitations and their effects, as well as the status of this progressive refinement process, we conduct an extensive search for optoacoustic image quality improvement approaches that have been evaluated with humans in vivo, thus focusing on clinically relevant outcomes. We query six databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, IEEE Xplore, ACM Digital Library, and Google Scholar) for articles published from 1 January 2010 to 31 October 2021, and identify 45 relevant research works through a systematic screening process. We review the identified approaches, describing their primary objectives, targeted limitations, and key technical implementation details. Moreover, considering comprehensive and objective quality assessment as an essential prerequisite for the adoption of such approaches in clinical practice, we subject 36 of the 45 papers to a further in-depth analysis of the reported quality evaluation procedures, and elicit a set of criteria with the intent to capture key evaluation aspects. Through a comparative criteria-wise rating process, we seek research efforts that exhibit excellence in quality assessment of their proposed methods, and discuss features that distinguish them from works with similar objectives. Additionally, informed by the rating results, we highlight areas with improvement potential, and extract recommendations for designing quality assessment pipelines capable of providing rich evidence.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
3.4
作者：
Hill ER;Xia W;Clarkson MJ;Desjardins AE
通讯作者：
Desjardins AE
影响因子：
10.6
作者：
Chowdhury, Kaushik Basak;Prakash, Jaya;Ntziachristos, Vasilis
通讯作者：
Ntziachristos, Vasilis
影响因子：
8.1
作者：
Fasoula NA;Karlas A;Kallmayer M;Milik AB;Pelisek J;Eckstein HH;Klingenspor M;Ntziachristos V
通讯作者：
Ntziachristos V
影响因子：
10.6
作者：
Aguirre, Juan;Berezhnoi, Andrei;Ntziachristos, Vasilis
通讯作者：
Ntziachristos, Vasilis
DOI：
10.1109/tbcas.2016.2593470
发表时间：
2017-04-01
影响因子：
5.1
作者：
Cao, Meng;Feng, Ting;Carson, Paul L.
通讯作者：
Carson, Paul L.