ARTERIAL STIFFNESS ESTIMATION BY SHEAR WAVE ELASTOGRAPHY: VALIDATION IN PHANTOMS WITH MECHANICAL TESTING

ARTERIAL STIFFNESS ESTIMATION BY SHEAR WAVE ELASTOGRAPHY: VALIDATION IN PHANTOMS WITH MECHANICAL TESTING
复制标题

DOI:
10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2015.08.012
复制
发表时间:
2016-01-01
影响因子:
2.9
通讯作者:
Bjallmark, Anna
Bjallmark, Anna
中科院分区:
医学3区
文献类型:
--
作者:
Maksuti, Elira;Widman, Erik;Bjallmark, Anna

文献摘要

被引文献

相似文献

动脉僵硬度是一个独立的危险因素,与多种心血管疾病相关。有人建议剪切波弹性成像(SWE)可用于定量测量局部动脉剪切模量,但尚未对该技术在动脉应用中的准确性进行评估。在本研究中,通过组速度分析和相速度分析评估了受限几何形状对剪切模量估计的影响,并在九个加压动脉模型中测量了 SWE 与机械测试的准确性。结果表明,与动脉模型中的机械测试相比,具有无限介质假设的群速度估计的剪切模量值不正确(群速度为 6.7 +/- 0.0 kPa,机械测试为 30.5 +/- 0.4 kPa)。相反,基于相速度分析 (30.6 +/- 3.2 kPa) 的 SWE 测量与机械测试非常一致,在评估的剪切模量范围 (40-100 kPa) 内,两种技术之间的相对误差为 8.8 +/- 6.0%。通过相速度分析进行的 SWE 经验证可以准确测量动脉模型的硬度。 (C) 2016 年作者。由 Elsevier Inc. 出版。这是一篇遵循 CC BY-NC-ND 许可的开放获取文章。
Arterial stiffness is an independent risk factor found to correlate with a wide range of cardiovascular diseases. It has been suggested that shear wave elastography (SWE) can be used to quantitatively measure local arterial shear modulus, but an accuracy assessment of the technique for arterial applications has not yet been performed. In this study, the influence of confined geometry on shear modulus estimation, by both group and phase velocity analysis, was assessed, and the accuracy of SWE in comparison with mechanical testing was measured in nine pressurized arterial phantoms. The results indicated that group velocity with an infinite medium assumption estimated shear modulus values incorrectly in comparison with mechanical testing in arterial phantoms (6.7 +/- 0.0 kPa from group velocity and 30.5 +/- 0.4 kPa from mechanical testing). To the contrary, SWE measurements based on phase velocity analysis (30.6 +/- 3.2 kPa) were in good agreement with mechanical testing, with a relative error between the two techniques of 8.8 +/- 6.0% in the shear modulus range evaluated (40-100 kPa). SWE by phase velocity analysis was validated to accurately measure stiffness in arterial phantoms. (C) 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license.