176 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32660213)
1. Reproducibility of shear wave elastography among operators, machines, and probes in an elasticity phantom.
Alrashed AI; Alfuraih AM
Ultrasonography; 2021 Jan; 40(1):158-166. PubMed ID: 32660213
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Performance evaluation of commercial and non-commercial shear wave elastography implementations for vascular applications.
Pruijssen JT; Schreuder FHBM; Wilbers J; Kaanders JHAM; de Korte CL; Hansen HHG
Ultrasonics; 2024 May; 140():107312. PubMed ID: 38599075
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Analysis of influencing factors of shear wave elastography of the superficial tissue: A phantom study.
Chen Q; Shi B; Zheng Y; Hu X
Front Med (Lausanne); 2022; 9():943844. PubMed ID: 36004380
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Variability, Validity and Operator Reliability of Three Ultrasound Systems for Measuring Tissue Stiffness: A Phantom Study.
Javed H; Oyibo SO; Alfuraih AM
Cureus; 2022 Nov; 14(11):e31731. PubMed ID: 36420046
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Superficial ultrasound shear wave speed measurements in soft and hard elasticity phantoms: repeatability and reproducibility using two ultrasound systems.
Dillman JR; Chen S; Davenport MS; Zhao H; Urban MW; Song P; Watcharotone K; Carson PL
Pediatr Radiol; 2015 Mar; 45(3):376-85. PubMed ID: 25249389
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Ultrasound Shear Wave Elastography for Liver Disease. A Critical Appraisal of the Many Actors on the Stage.
Piscaglia F; Salvatore V; Mulazzani L; Cantisani V; Schiavone C
Ultraschall Med; 2016 Feb; 37(1):1-5. PubMed ID: 26871407
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Reproducibility of 2-Dimensional Shear Wave Elastography Assessment of the Liver: A Direct Comparison With Point Shear Wave Elastography in Healthy Volunteers.
Fang C; Konstantatou E; Romanos O; Yusuf GT; Quinlan DJ; Sidhu PS
J Ultrasound Med; 2017 Aug; 36(8):1563-1569. PubMed ID: 28370146
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Evaluation of ultrasound point shear wave elastography reliability in an elasticity phantom.
Sultan SR; Alghamdi A; Abdeen R; Almutairi F
Ultrasonography; 2022 Apr; 41(2):291-297. PubMed ID: 35316890
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Clinical acceptance testing and scanner comparison of ultrasound shear wave elastography.
Long Z; Tradup DJ; Song P; Stekel SF; Chen S; Glazebrook KN; Hangiandreou NJ
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2018 May; 19(3):336-342. PubMed ID: 29542277
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Reproducibility of 2 Liver 2-Dimensional Shear Wave Elastographic Techniques in the Fasting and Postprandial States.
Simkin P; Rattansingh A; Liu K; Hudson JM; Atri M; Jang HJ; Kim TK; Khalili K
J Ultrasound Med; 2019 Jul; 38(7):1739-1745. PubMed ID: 30536401
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Intra- and inter-operator reproducibility of US point shear-wave elastography in various organs: evaluation in phantoms and healthy volunteers.
Kishimoto R; Kikuchi K; Koyama A; Kershaw J; Omatsu T; Tachibana Y; Suga M; Obata T
Eur Radiol; 2019 Nov; 29(11):5999-6008. PubMed ID: 31089847
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Assessment of ultrasound shear wave elastography within muscles using different region of interest sizes, manufacturers, probes and acquisition angles: an
Wang X; Zhu J; Gao J; Hu Y; Liu Y; Li W; Chen S; Liu F
Quant Imaging Med Surg; 2022 Jun; 12(6):3227-3237. PubMed ID: 35655847
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A Novel Elastography Phantom Prototype for Assessment of Ultrasound Elastography Imaging Performance.
Al-Mutairi FF; Chung EM; Moran CM; Ramnarine KV
Ultrasound Med Biol; 2021 Sep; 47(9):2749-2758. PubMed ID: 34144833
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Variability of Transrectal Shear Wave Elastography in a Phantom Model.
Lee J; Yoon SK; Cho JH; Kwon HJ; Kim DW; Lee JW
J Korean Soc Radiol; 2023 Sep; 84(5):1110-1122. PubMed ID: 37869125
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 2-D Shear Wave Elastography for Focal Lesions in Liver Phantoms: Effects of Background Stiffness, Depth and Size of Focal Lesions on Stiffness Measurement.
Hwang JA; Jeong WK; Song KD; Kang KA; Lim HK
Ultrasound Med Biol; 2019 Dec; 45(12):3261-3268. PubMed ID: 31493955
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Accuracy and reproducibility of shear wave elastography according to the size and elasticity of lesions: A phantom study.
Kim H; Kim H; Han BK; Choi JS; Ko ES; Ko EY
Medicine (Baltimore); 2022 Oct; 101(41):e31095. PubMed ID: 36253983
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of shear wave velocities on ultrasound elastography between different machines, transducers, and acquisition depths: a phantom study.
Shin HJ; Kim MJ; Kim HY; Roh YH; Lee MJ
Eur Radiol; 2016 Oct; 26(10):3361-7. PubMed ID: 26815368
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Reproducibility of liver stiffness measurements made with two different 2-dimensional shear wave elastography systems using the comb-push technique.
Ryu H; Ahn SJ; Yoon JH; Lee JM
Ultrasonography; 2019 Jul; 38(3):246-254. PubMed ID: 30744303
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A New Criterion for Shear Wave Elastometric Assessment Using Modulus of Stiffness Difference between Object and Environment.
Demin IY; Rykhtik PI; Spivak АE; Safonov DV
Sovrem Tekhnologii Med; 2022; 14(5):5-13. PubMed ID: 37181832
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Validation of intra- and interobserver reproducibility of shearwave elastography: Phantom study.
Mun HS; Choi SH; Kook SH; Choi Y; Jeong WK; Kim Y
Ultrasonics; 2013 Jul; 53(5):1039-43. PubMed ID: 23466037
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
