MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042152936 · doi:10.1118/1.3557883

Quantification of prostate deformation due to needle insertion during TRUS‐guided biopsy: Comparison of hand‐held and mechanically stabilized systems

2011· article· en· W2042152936 on OpenAlexafffund
Tharindu De Silva, Aaron Fenster, Jeffrey Bax, Cesare Romagnoli, Jonathan I. Izawa, Jagath Samarabandu, Aaron D. Ward

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoft Robotics and Applications
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical TrialsWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchOntario Institute for Cancer Research
KeywordsBiopsyProstateProstate cancerProstate biopsyMedicineRadiologyCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Prostate biopsy is the clinical standard for the definitive diagnosis of prostate cancer. To overcome the limitations of 2D TRUS-guided biopsy systems when targeting preplanned locations, systems have been developed with 3D guidance to improve the accuracy of cancer detection. Prostate deformation due to needle insertion and biopsy gun firing is a potential source of error that can cause target misalignments during biopsies. METHODS: The authors used nonrigid registration of 2D TRUS images to quantify the deformation that occurs during the needle insertion and the biopsy gun firing procedure and compare this effect in biopsies performed using a hand-held TRUS probe to those performed using a mechanically assisted 3D TRUS-guided biopsy system. The authors calculated a spatially varying 95% confidence interval on the prostate tissue motion and analyzed this motion both as a function of distance to the biopsy needle and as a function of distance to the lower piercing point of the prostate. The former is relevant because biopsy targets lie along the needle axis, and the latter is of particular importance due to the reported high concentration of prostate cancer in the peripheral zone, a substantial portion of which lies on the posterior side of the prostate where biopsy needles enter the prostate after penetrating the rectal wall during transrectal biopsy. RESULTS: The results show that for both systems, the tissue deformation is such that throughout the length of the needle axis, including regions proximal to the lower piercing point, spherical tumors with a radius of 2.1 mm or more can be sampled with 95% confidence under the assumption of zero error elsewhere in the biopsy system. More deformation was observed in the direction orthogonal to the needle axis compared to the direction parallel to the needle axis; this is of particular importance given the long, narrow shape of the biopsy core. The authors measured lateral tissue motion proximal to the needle axis of not more than 1.5 mm, with 95% confidence. The authors observed a statistically significant and clinically insignificant maximum difference of 0.38 mm in the deformation, resulting from the hand-held and mechanically assisted systems along the needle axis, and the mechanical system resulted in a lower relative increase in deformation proximal to the needle axis during needle insertion, as well as lower variability of deformation during biopsy gun firing. CONCLUSIONS: Given the clinical need to biopsy tumors of volume greater than or equal to 0.5 cm3, corresponding to spherical tumors with a radius of 5 mm or more, the tissue motion induced by needle insertion and gun firing is an important consideration when setting the design specifications for TRUS-guided prostate biopsy systems.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations25
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicSoft Robotics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207