Evaluation of Scatterer Parameters From Ultrasound Scattering Models Taking Into Account Scattering From Nuclei and Cells of Cell-Pellet Biophantoms and Ex Vivo Tumors.

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q1 ACOUSTICS Ultrasonic Imaging Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-14 DOI:10.1177/01617346241256120
Pauline Muleki-Seya, William D O'Brien
{"title":"Evaluation of Scatterer Parameters From Ultrasound Scattering Models Taking Into Account Scattering From Nuclei and Cells of Cell-Pellet Biophantoms and Ex Vivo Tumors.","authors":"Pauline Muleki-Seya, William D O'Brien","doi":"10.1177/01617346241256120","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Quantitative Ultrasound backscatter coefficient provides the capability to evaluate tissue microstructure parameters. Tissue-based scatterer parameters are extracted using ultrasound scattering models. It is challenging to correlate ultrasound scatterer parameters of tissue structures from optical-measured histology, possibly because of inappropriate scattering models or the presence of multiple scatterers. The objective of this study is to pursue the quantification of pertinent scatterer parameters with scattering models that consider ultrasound scattering from nuclei and cells. The concentric sphere model (CSM) and the structure factor model adapted for two types of scatterers (SFM2) are evaluated for cell-pellet biophantoms and ex vivo tumors of four cell lines: 4T1, JC, LMTK, and MAT. The structure factor model (SFM) was used for comparison. CSM and SFM2 provided scatterer parameters closer to histology (lower relative errors) for nucleus and cell radii and volume fractions than SFM but were not always accompanied by lower dispersion of the scatterer distribution (lower coefficient of variation). CSM and SFM2 quantified cell and nucleus radius and volume fraction parameters with lower relative error compared to SFM. For tumors, CSM provided better results than SFM2.</p>","PeriodicalId":49401,"journal":{"name":"Ultrasonic Imaging","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ultrasonic Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01617346241256120","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ACOUSTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Quantitative Ultrasound backscatter coefficient provides the capability to evaluate tissue microstructure parameters. Tissue-based scatterer parameters are extracted using ultrasound scattering models. It is challenging to correlate ultrasound scatterer parameters of tissue structures from optical-measured histology, possibly because of inappropriate scattering models or the presence of multiple scatterers. The objective of this study is to pursue the quantification of pertinent scatterer parameters with scattering models that consider ultrasound scattering from nuclei and cells. The concentric sphere model (CSM) and the structure factor model adapted for two types of scatterers (SFM2) are evaluated for cell-pellet biophantoms and ex vivo tumors of four cell lines: 4T1, JC, LMTK, and MAT. The structure factor model (SFM) was used for comparison. CSM and SFM2 provided scatterer parameters closer to histology (lower relative errors) for nucleus and cell radii and volume fractions than SFM but were not always accompanied by lower dispersion of the scatterer distribution (lower coefficient of variation). CSM and SFM2 quantified cell and nucleus radius and volume fraction parameters with lower relative error compared to SFM. For tumors, CSM provided better results than SFM2.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估超声散射模型的散射参数,考虑细胞颗粒生物体和体内肿瘤的细胞核和细胞的散射。
定量超声后向散射系数可评估组织微观结构参数。基于组织的散射体参数是利用超声散射模型提取的。从光学测量的组织学中关联组织结构的超声散射体参数具有挑战性,这可能是因为散射模型不合适或存在多个散射体。本研究的目的是利用考虑到细胞核和细胞的超声散射的散射模型来量化相关的散射体参数。同心球体模型(CSM)和针对两种类型散射体的结构因子模型(SFM2)针对细胞颗粒生物体和四种细胞系的体外肿瘤进行了评估:4T1、JC、LMTK 和 MAT。结构因子模型(SFM)用于比较。与 SFM 相比,CSM 和 SFM2 提供的细胞核和细胞半径及体积分数的散射体参数更接近组织学(相对误差更小),但散射体分布的离散性并不总是更低(变异系数更小)。与 SFM 相比,CSM 和 SFM2 量化细胞和细胞核半径及体积分数参数的相对误差更小。在肿瘤方面,CSM 的结果优于 SFM2。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Ultrasonic Imaging
Ultrasonic Imaging 医学-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
8.70%
发文量
15
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Ultrasonic Imaging provides rapid publication for original and exceptional papers concerned with the development and application of ultrasonic-imaging technology. Ultrasonic Imaging publishes articles in the following areas: theoretical and experimental aspects of advanced methods and instrumentation for imaging
期刊最新文献
Development of a Polymer Ultrasound Contrast Agent Incorporating Nested Carbon Nanodots. Automated Deep Learning-Based Finger Joint Segmentation in 3-D Ultrasound Images With Limited Dataset. CBAM-RIUnet: Breast Tumor Segmentation With Enhanced Breast Ultrasound and Test-Time Augmentation Deep learning Radiomics Based on Two-Dimensional Ultrasound for Predicting the Efficacy of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer SPGAN Optimized by Piranha Foraging Optimization for Thyroid Nodule Classification in Ultrasound Images
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1