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 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. Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Halevy-Politch, Jacob [verfasserIn] Zaaroor, Menashe [verfasserIn] Sinai, Alon [verfasserIn] Constantinescu, Marius [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2020

Schlagwörter:	Neurosurgery Tumor Ultrasound Pulse-echo Residual thickness

Übergeordnetes Werk:	Enthalten in: Chinese neurosurgical journal - London : BioMed Central, 2015, 6(2020), 1 vom: 05. Aug.
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:6 ; year:2020 ; number:1 ; day:05 ; month:08

Links:	Volltext

DOI / URN:	10.1186/s41016-020-00205-1

Katalog-ID:	SPR040559416

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	SPR040559416
003	DE-627
005	20230520003049.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	201007s2020 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1186/s41016-020-00205-1 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)SPR040559416
035			\|a (SPR)s41016-020-00205-1-e
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
082	0	4	\|a 610 \|q ASE
100	1		\|a Halevy-Politch, Jacob \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a New US device versus imaging US to assess tumor-in-brain
264		1	\|c 2020
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a 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.
650		4	\|a Neurosurgery \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Tumor \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Ultrasound \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Pulse-echo \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Residual thickness \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
700	1		\|a Zaaroor, Menashe \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Sinai, Alon \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Constantinescu, Marius \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i Enthalten in \|t Chinese neurosurgical journal \|d London : BioMed Central, 2015 \|g 6(2020), 1 vom: 05. Aug. \|w (DE-627)837397626 \|w (DE-600)2836334-6 \|x 2057-4967 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:6 \|g year:2020 \|g number:1 \|g day:05 \|g month:08
856	4	0	\|u https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41016-020-00205-1 \|z kostenfrei \|3 Volltext
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_SPRINGER
912			\|a SSG-OLC-PHA
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_31
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_74
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_206
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 6 \|j 2020 \|e 1 \|b 05 \|c 08

Indexfelder

author_variant	j h p jhp m z mz a s as m c mc
matchkey_str	article:20574967:2020----::eudvcvruiaigsose
hierarchy_sort_str	2020
publishDate	2020
allfields	10.1186/s41016-020-00205-1 doi (DE-627)SPR040559416 (SPR)s41016-020-00205-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 ASE Halevy-Politch, Jacob verfasserin aut New US device versus imaging US to assess tumor-in-brain 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier 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. Neurosurgery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Tumor (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ultrasound (dpeaa)DE-He213 Pulse-echo (dpeaa)DE-He213 Residual thickness (dpeaa)DE-He213 Zaaroor, Menashe verfasserin aut Sinai, Alon verfasserin aut Constantinescu, Marius verfasserin aut Enthalten in Chinese neurosurgical journal London : BioMed Central, 2015 6(2020), 1 vom: 05. Aug. (DE-627)837397626 (DE-600)2836334-6 2057-4967 nnns volume:6 year:2020 number:1 day:05 month:08 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41016-020-00205-1 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 6 2020 1 05 08
spelling	10.1186/s41016-020-00205-1 doi (DE-627)SPR040559416 (SPR)s41016-020-00205-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 ASE Halevy-Politch, Jacob verfasserin aut New US device versus imaging US to assess tumor-in-brain 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier 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. Neurosurgery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Tumor (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ultrasound (dpeaa)DE-He213 Pulse-echo (dpeaa)DE-He213 Residual thickness (dpeaa)DE-He213 Zaaroor, Menashe verfasserin aut Sinai, Alon verfasserin aut Constantinescu, Marius verfasserin aut Enthalten in Chinese neurosurgical journal London : BioMed Central, 2015 6(2020), 1 vom: 05. Aug. (DE-627)837397626 (DE-600)2836334-6 2057-4967 nnns volume:6 year:2020 number:1 day:05 month:08 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41016-020-00205-1 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 6 2020 1 05 08
allfields_unstemmed	10.1186/s41016-020-00205-1 doi (DE-627)SPR040559416 (SPR)s41016-020-00205-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 ASE Halevy-Politch, Jacob verfasserin aut New US device versus imaging US to assess tumor-in-brain 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier 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. Neurosurgery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Tumor (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ultrasound (dpeaa)DE-He213 Pulse-echo (dpeaa)DE-He213 Residual thickness (dpeaa)DE-He213 Zaaroor, Menashe verfasserin aut Sinai, Alon verfasserin aut Constantinescu, Marius verfasserin aut Enthalten in Chinese neurosurgical journal London : BioMed Central, 2015 6(2020), 1 vom: 05. Aug. (DE-627)837397626 (DE-600)2836334-6 2057-4967 nnns volume:6 year:2020 number:1 day:05 month:08 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41016-020-00205-1 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 6 2020 1 05 08
allfieldsGer	10.1186/s41016-020-00205-1 doi (DE-627)SPR040559416 (SPR)s41016-020-00205-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 ASE Halevy-Politch, Jacob verfasserin aut New US device versus imaging US to assess tumor-in-brain 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier 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. Neurosurgery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Tumor (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ultrasound (dpeaa)DE-He213 Pulse-echo (dpeaa)DE-He213 Residual thickness (dpeaa)DE-He213 Zaaroor, Menashe verfasserin aut Sinai, Alon verfasserin aut Constantinescu, Marius verfasserin aut Enthalten in Chinese neurosurgical journal London : BioMed Central, 2015 6(2020), 1 vom: 05. Aug. (DE-627)837397626 (DE-600)2836334-6 2057-4967 nnns volume:6 year:2020 number:1 day:05 month:08 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41016-020-00205-1 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 6 2020 1 05 08
allfieldsSound	10.1186/s41016-020-00205-1 doi (DE-627)SPR040559416 (SPR)s41016-020-00205-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 ASE Halevy-Politch, Jacob verfasserin aut New US device versus imaging US to assess tumor-in-brain 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier 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. Neurosurgery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Tumor (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ultrasound (dpeaa)DE-He213 Pulse-echo (dpeaa)DE-He213 Residual thickness (dpeaa)DE-He213 Zaaroor, Menashe verfasserin aut Sinai, Alon verfasserin aut Constantinescu, Marius verfasserin aut Enthalten in Chinese neurosurgical journal London : BioMed Central, 2015 6(2020), 1 vom: 05. Aug. (DE-627)837397626 (DE-600)2836334-6 2057-4967 nnns volume:6 year:2020 number:1 day:05 month:08 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41016-020-00205-1 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 6 2020 1 05 08
language	English
source	Enthalten in Chinese neurosurgical journal 6(2020), 1 vom: 05. Aug. volume:6 year:2020 number:1 day:05 month:08
sourceStr	Enthalten in Chinese neurosurgical journal 6(2020), 1 vom: 05. Aug. volume:6 year:2020 number:1 day:05 month:08
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Neurosurgery Tumor Ultrasound Pulse-echo Residual thickness
dewey-raw	610
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	Chinese neurosurgical journal
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Halevy-Politch, Jacob @@aut@@ Zaaroor, Menashe @@aut@@ Sinai, Alon @@aut@@ Constantinescu, Marius @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2020-08-05T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	837397626
dewey-sort	3610
id	SPR040559416
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR040559416</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230520003049.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201007s2020 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s41016-020-00205-1</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR040559416</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s41016-020-00205-1-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Halevy-Politch, Jacob</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">New US device versus imaging US to assess tumor-in-brain</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">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.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Neurosurgery</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Tumor</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Ultrasound</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Pulse-echo</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Residual thickness</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zaaroor, Menashe</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sinai, Alon</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Constantinescu, Marius</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Chinese neurosurgical journal</subfield><subfield code="d">London : BioMed Central, 2015</subfield><subfield code="g">6(2020), 1 vom: 05. Aug.</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)837397626</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2836334-6</subfield><subfield code="x">2057-4967</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:6</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2020</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:05</subfield><subfield code="g">month:08</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41016-020-00205-1</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">6</subfield><subfield code="j">2020</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">05</subfield><subfield code="c">08</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
author	Halevy-Politch, Jacob
spellingShingle	Halevy-Politch, Jacob ddc 610 misc Neurosurgery misc Tumor misc Ultrasound misc Pulse-echo misc Residual thickness New US device versus imaging US to assess tumor-in-brain
authorStr	Halevy-Politch, Jacob
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)837397626
format	electronic Article
dewey-ones	610 - Medicine & health
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut aut
collection	springer
remote_str	true
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	2057-4967
topic_title	610 ASE New US device versus imaging US to assess tumor-in-brain Neurosurgery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Tumor (dpeaa)DE-He213 Ultrasound (dpeaa)DE-He213 Pulse-echo (dpeaa)DE-He213 Residual thickness (dpeaa)DE-He213
topic	ddc 610 misc Neurosurgery misc Tumor misc Ultrasound misc Pulse-echo misc Residual thickness
topic_unstemmed	ddc 610 misc Neurosurgery misc Tumor misc Ultrasound misc Pulse-echo misc Residual thickness
topic_browse	ddc 610 misc Neurosurgery misc Tumor misc Ultrasound misc Pulse-echo misc Residual thickness
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	Chinese neurosurgical journal
hierarchy_parent_id	837397626
dewey-tens	610 - Medicine & health
hierarchy_top_title	Chinese neurosurgical journal
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)837397626 (DE-600)2836334-6
title	New US device versus imaging US to assess tumor-in-brain
ctrlnum	(DE-627)SPR040559416 (SPR)s41016-020-00205-1-e
title_full	New US device versus imaging US to assess tumor-in-brain
author_sort	Halevy-Politch, Jacob
journal	Chinese neurosurgical journal
journalStr	Chinese neurosurgical journal
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
dewey-hundreds	600 - Technology
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2020
contenttype_str_mv	txt
author_browse	Halevy-Politch, Jacob Zaaroor, Menashe Sinai, Alon Constantinescu, Marius
container_volume	6
class	610 ASE
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Halevy-Politch, Jacob
doi_str_mv	10.1186/s41016-020-00205-1
dewey-full	610
author2-role	verfasserin
title_sort	new us device versus imaging us to assess tumor-in-brain
title_auth	New US device versus imaging US to assess tumor-in-brain
abstract	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.
abstractGer	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.
abstract_unstemmed	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.
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
container_issue	1
title_short	New US device versus imaging US to assess tumor-in-brain
url	https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41016-020-00205-1
remote_bool	true
author2	Zaaroor, Menashe Sinai, Alon Constantinescu, Marius
author2Str	Zaaroor, Menashe Sinai, Alon Constantinescu, Marius
ppnlink	837397626
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1186/s41016-020-00205-1
up_date	2024-07-03T16:47:20.914Z
_version_	1803577187016638464
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR040559416</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230520003049.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201007s2020 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s41016-020-00205-1</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR040559416</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s41016-020-00205-1-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Halevy-Politch, Jacob</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">New US device versus imaging US to assess tumor-in-brain</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">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.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Neurosurgery</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Tumor</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Ultrasound</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Pulse-echo</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Residual thickness</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zaaroor, Menashe</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sinai, Alon</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Constantinescu, Marius</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Chinese neurosurgical journal</subfield><subfield code="d">London : BioMed Central, 2015</subfield><subfield code="g">6(2020), 1 vom: 05. Aug.</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)837397626</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2836334-6</subfield><subfield code="x">2057-4967</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:6</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2020</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:05</subfield><subfield code="g">month:08</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41016-020-00205-1</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">6</subfield><subfield code="j">2020</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">05</subfield><subfield code="c">08</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.399106

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

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

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?