4.6 Article

Ultra wideband (0.5-16 kHz) MR elastography for robust shear viscoelasticity model identification

Journal

PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY
Volume 59, Issue 24, Pages 7717-7734

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/59/24/7717

Keywords

magnetic resonance elastography; viscoelasticity; fractional model; multiscale

Funding

  1. NIH [EB 012142]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Changes in the viscoelastic parameters of soft biological tissues often correlate with progression of disease, trauma or injury, and response to treatment. Identifying the most appropriate viscoelastic model, then estimating and monitoring the corresponding parameters of that model can improve insight into the underlying tissue structural changes. MR Elastography (MRE) provides a quantitative method of measuring tissue viscoelasticity. In a previous study by the authors (Yasar et al 2013 Magn. Reson. Med. 70 479-89), a silicone-based phantom material was examined over the frequency range of 200 Hz-7.75 kHz using MRE, an unprecedented bandwidth at that time. Six viscoelastic models including four integer order models and two fractional order models, were fit to the wideband viscoelastic data (measured storage and loss moduli as a function of frequency). The 'fractional Voigt' model (spring and springpot in parallel) exhibited the best fit and was even able to fit the entire frequency band well when it was identified based only on a small portion of the band. This paper is an extension of that study with a wider frequency range from 500 Hz to 16 kHz. Furthermore, more fractional order viscoelastic models are added to the comparison pool. It is found that added complexity of the viscoelastic model provides only marginal improvement over the 'fractional Voigt' model. And, again, the fractional order models show significant improvement over integer order viscoelastic models that have as many or more fitting parameters.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available