» Articles » PMID: 35314624

Finite Element Modeling of Quantitative Ultrasound Analysis of the Surgical Margin of Breast Tumor

Overview
Journal Tomography
Publisher MDPI
Specialty Radiology
Date 2022 Mar 22
PMID 35314624
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Ultrasound is commonly used as an imaging tool in the medical sector. Compared to standard ultrasound imaging, quantitative ultrasound analysis can provide more details about a material microstructure. In this study, quantitative ultrasound analysis was conducted through computational modeling to detect various breast duct pathologies in the surgical margin tissue. Both pulse-echo and pitch-catch methods were evaluated for a high-frequency (22-41 MHz) ultrasound analysis. The computational surgical margin modeling was based on various conditions of breast ducts, such as normal duct, ductal hyperplasia, DCIS, and calcification. In each model, ultrasound pressure magnitude variation in the frequency spectrum was analyzed through peak density and mean-peak-to-valley distance (MPVD) values. Furthermore, the spectral patterns of all the margin models were compared to extract more pathology-based information. For the pitch-catch mode, only peak density provided a trend in relation to different duct pathologies. For the pulse-echo mode, only the MPVD was able to do that. From the spectral comparison, it was found that overall pressure magnitude, spectral variation, peak pressure magnitude, and corresponding frequency level provided helpful information to differentiate various pathologies in the surgical margin.

Citing Articles

A review of bioengineering techniques applied to breast tissue: Mechanical properties, tissue engineering and finite element analysis.

Teixeira A, Martins P Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2023; 11:1161815.

PMID: 37077233 PMC: 10106631. DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2023.1161815.

References
1.
Culjat M, Goldenberg D, Tewari P, Singh R . A review of tissue substitutes for ultrasound imaging. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2010; 36(6):861-73. DOI: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2010.02.012. View

2.
Elsewe M . Evaluation of EM absorption loss over breast mass for breast cancer diagnosis. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2012; 2011:3897-900. DOI: 10.1109/IEMBS.2011.6090968. View

3.
Gray R, Pockaj B, Garvey E, Blair S . Intraoperative Margin Management in Breast-Conserving Surgery: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017; 25(1):18-27. DOI: 10.1245/s10434-016-5756-4. View

4.
Maloney B, McClatchy D, Pogue B, Paulsen K, Wells W, Barth R . Review of methods for intraoperative margin detection for breast conserving surgery. J Biomed Opt. 2018; 23(10):1-19. PMC: 6210801. DOI: 10.1117/1.JBO.23.10.100901. View

5.
Ernster V, Barclay J . Increases in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast in relation to mammography: a dilemma. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1997; (22):151-6. DOI: 10.1093/jncimono/1997.22.151. View