A hybrid breast biopsy system combining ultrasound and MRI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
System design and initial phantom accuracy results for a novel biopsy system integrating both magnetic resonance (MR) and ultrasound (US) imaging modalities are presented. A phantom experiment was performed to investigate the efficacy of this hybrid guidance biopsy technique in a breast tissue mimicking phantom. A comparison between MR-guided core biopsy verses MR/US-guided core biopsy of phantom targets was realized using a scoring system based on the consistency of the acquired core samples (14 gauge). It was determined that the addition of US to guide needle placement improved the accuracy from an average score of 7.4 out of 10 (MRI guidance alone), to 9.6 (MRI/US guidance) over 21 trials. The average amount of needle tip correction resulting from the additional US information was determined to be 3.7 mm. This correction value is substantial, equal to approximately one radius of the intended targets. Hybrid US/MRI guided biopsy appears to offer a simple means to ensure accurate breast tissue sampling without the need for repeat MRI scans for verification or the need for real-time imaging in open MRI geometries.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".