Maksuti Elira, Widman Erik, Larsson David, Urban Matthew W, Larsson Matilda, Bjällmark Anna
Department of Medical Engineering, School of Technology and Health, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden; Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Solna, Sweden.
Department of Medical Engineering, School of Technology and Health, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden; Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Solna, Sweden.
Ultrasound Med Biol. 2016 Jan;42(1):308-21. doi: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2015.08.012. Epub 2015 Oct 9.
Arterial stiffness is an independent risk factor found to correlate with a wide range of cardiovascular diseases. It has been suggested that shear wave elastography (SWE) can be used to quantitatively measure local arterial shear modulus, but an accuracy assessment of the technique for arterial applications has not yet been performed. In this study, the influence of confined geometry on shear modulus estimation, by both group and phase velocity analysis, was assessed, and the accuracy of SWE in comparison with mechanical testing was measured in nine pressurized arterial phantoms. The results indicated that group velocity with an infinite medium assumption estimated shear modulus values incorrectly in comparison with mechanical testing in arterial phantoms (6.7 ± 0.0 kPa from group velocity and 30.5 ± 0.4 kPa from mechanical testing). To the contrary, SWE measurements based on phase velocity analysis (30.6 ± 3.2 kPa) were in good agreement with mechanical testing, with a relative error between the two techniques of 8.8 ± 6.0% in the shear modulus range evaluated (40-100 kPa). SWE by phase velocity analysis was validated to accurately measure stiffness in arterial phantoms.
动脉僵硬度是一种独立的风险因素,已发现其与多种心血管疾病相关。有人提出,剪切波弹性成像(SWE)可用于定量测量局部动脉剪切模量,但尚未对该技术在动脉应用中的准确性进行评估。在本研究中,通过群速度和相速度分析评估了受限几何形状对剪切模量估计的影响,并在九个加压动脉模型中测量了SWE与机械测试相比的准确性。结果表明,与动脉模型中的机械测试相比,采用无限介质假设的群速度估计的剪切模量值不正确(群速度为6.7±0.0 kPa,机械测试为30.5±0.4 kPa)。相反,基于相速度分析的SWE测量值(30.6±3.2 kPa)与机械测试结果吻合良好,在评估的剪切模量范围(40 - 100 kPa)内,两种技术之间的相对误差为8.8±6.0%。通过相速度分析的SWE经验证可准确测量动脉模型中的僵硬度。