Cargando…

New US device versus imaging US to assess tumor-in-brain

BACKGROUND: Applying ultrasonic imaging system during surgery requires the poring of saline, performing the measurement, and acquiring data from its display—which requires time and is highly “performer dependent,” i.e., the measure is of a subjective nature. A new ultrasonic device was recently deve...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Halevy-Politch, Jacob, Zaaroor, Menashe, Sinai, Alon, Constantinescu, Marius
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7405364/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32922957
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41016-020-00205-1
_version_ 1783567238478954496
author Halevy-Politch, Jacob
Zaaroor, Menashe
Sinai, Alon
Constantinescu, Marius
author_facet Halevy-Politch, Jacob
Zaaroor, Menashe
Sinai, Alon
Constantinescu, Marius
author_sort Halevy-Politch, Jacob
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Applying ultrasonic imaging system during surgery requires the poring of saline, performing the measurement, and acquiring data from its display—which requires time and is highly “performer dependent,” i.e., the measure is of a subjective nature. A new ultrasonic device was recently developed that overcomes most of these drawbacks and was successfully applied during tumor-in-brain neurosurgeries. The purpose of this study was to compare the two types of US devices and demonstrate their properties. METHODS: The study was performed in the following stages: (i) an ex vivo experiment, where slices of the muscle and brain of a young porcine were laid one on top the other. Thicknesses and border depths were measured and compared, using the two types of US instruments. (ii) During human clinical neurosurgeries, tumor depth was compared by measuring it with both devices. (iii) Following the success of stages (i) and (ii), using solely the new US device, the tumor thickness was monitored while its resection. Correlation, Pearson’s coefficient, average, mean, and standard deviation were applied for statistical tests. RESULTS: A high correlation was obtained for the distances of tissue borders and for their respective thicknesses. Applying these ultrasonic devices during neurosurgeries, tumor depths were monitored with high similarity (87%), which was also obtained by Pearson’s correlation coefficient (0.44). The new US device, thanks to its small footprint, its remote measurement, and the capability of monitoring intraoperatively and in real-time, provides the approach to tumor’s border before its complete resection. CONCLUSIONS: The new US device provides better accuracy than an ultrasonic imaging system; its data is objective; it enables to control the residual tumor thickness during its resection, and it is especially useful in restricted areas. These features were found of great help during a tumor-in-brain surgery and especially in the final stages of tumor’s resection.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7405364
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74053642020-09-10 New US device versus imaging US to assess tumor-in-brain Halevy-Politch, Jacob Zaaroor, Menashe Sinai, Alon Constantinescu, Marius Chin Neurosurg J Research BACKGROUND: Applying ultrasonic imaging system during surgery requires the poring of saline, performing the measurement, and acquiring data from its display—which requires time and is highly “performer dependent,” i.e., the measure is of a subjective nature. A new ultrasonic device was recently developed that overcomes most of these drawbacks and was successfully applied during tumor-in-brain neurosurgeries. The purpose of this study was to compare the two types of US devices and demonstrate their properties. METHODS: The study was performed in the following stages: (i) an ex vivo experiment, where slices of the muscle and brain of a young porcine were laid one on top the other. Thicknesses and border depths were measured and compared, using the two types of US instruments. (ii) During human clinical neurosurgeries, tumor depth was compared by measuring it with both devices. (iii) Following the success of stages (i) and (ii), using solely the new US device, the tumor thickness was monitored while its resection. Correlation, Pearson’s coefficient, average, mean, and standard deviation were applied for statistical tests. RESULTS: A high correlation was obtained for the distances of tissue borders and for their respective thicknesses. Applying these ultrasonic devices during neurosurgeries, tumor depths were monitored with high similarity (87%), which was also obtained by Pearson’s correlation coefficient (0.44). The new US device, thanks to its small footprint, its remote measurement, and the capability of monitoring intraoperatively and in real-time, provides the approach to tumor’s border before its complete resection. CONCLUSIONS: The new US device provides better accuracy than an ultrasonic imaging system; its data is objective; it enables to control the residual tumor thickness during its resection, and it is especially useful in restricted areas. These features were found of great help during a tumor-in-brain surgery and especially in the final stages of tumor’s resection. BioMed Central 2020-08-05 /pmc/articles/PMC7405364/ /pubmed/32922957 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41016-020-00205-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Halevy-Politch, Jacob
Zaaroor, Menashe
Sinai, Alon
Constantinescu, Marius
New US device versus imaging US to assess tumor-in-brain
title New US device versus imaging US to assess tumor-in-brain
title_full New US device versus imaging US to assess tumor-in-brain
title_fullStr New US device versus imaging US to assess tumor-in-brain
title_full_unstemmed New US device versus imaging US to assess tumor-in-brain
title_short New US device versus imaging US to assess tumor-in-brain
title_sort new us device versus imaging us to assess tumor-in-brain
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7405364/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32922957
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41016-020-00205-1
work_keys_str_mv AT halevypolitchjacob newusdeviceversusimagingustoassesstumorinbrain
AT zaaroormenashe newusdeviceversusimagingustoassesstumorinbrain
AT sinaialon newusdeviceversusimagingustoassesstumorinbrain
AT constantinescumarius newusdeviceversusimagingustoassesstumorinbrain