Biomechanical properties of soft tissues can provide information regarding the local health status. Often the cells in pathological tissues can be found to form a stiff extracellular environment, which is a sensitive, early diagnostic indicator of disease. Quasi-static ultrasonic elasticity imaging provides a way to image the mechanical properties of tissues. Strain images provide a map of the relative tissue stiffness, but ambiguities and artifacts limit its diagnostic value. Accurately mapping intrinsic mechanical parameters of a region may increase diagnostic specificity. However, the inverse problem, whereby force and displacement estimates are used to estimate a constitutive matrix, is ill conditioned. Our method avoids many of the issues involved with solving the inverse problem, such as unknown boundary conditions and incomplete information about the stress field, by building an empirical model directly from measured data. Surface force and volumetric displacement data gathered during imaging are used in conjunction with the AutoProgressive method to teach artificial neural networks the stress-strain relationship of tissues. The Autoprogressive algorithm has been successfully used in many civil engineering applications and to estimate ocular pressure and corneal stiffness; here, we are expanding its use to any tissues imaged ultrasonically. We show that force-displacement data recorded with an ultrasound probe and displacements estimated at a few points in the imaged region can be used to estimate the full stress and strain vectors throughout an entire model while only assuming conservation laws. We will also demonstrate methods to parameterize the mechanical properties based on the stress-strain response of trained neural networks. This method is a fundamentally new approach to medical elasticity imaging that for the first time provides full stress and strain vectors from one set of observation data.
[1]
M. Erdoğan,et al.
Ultrasound elastography is not superior to grayscale ultrasound in predicting malignancy in thyroid nodules.
,
2012,
Thyroid : official journal of the American Thyroid Association.
[2]
J. Ophir,et al.
Elastography: A Quantitative Method for Imaging the Elasticity of Biological Tissues
,
1991,
Ultrasonic imaging.
[3]
Youssef M A Hashash,et al.
Numerical implementation of a neural network based material model in finite element analysis
,
2004
.
[4]
Colleen H. Neal,et al.
Accuracy of quantitative ultrasound elastography for differentiation of malignant and benign breast abnormalities: a meta-analysis
,
2012,
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.
[5]
Thomas Deffieux,et al.
Quantitative assessment of breast lesion viscoelasticity: initial clinical results using supersonic shear imaging.
,
2008,
Ultrasound in medicine & biology.
[6]
Paul E. Barbone,et al.
Elastic modulus imaging: On the uniqueness and nonuniqueness of the elastography inverse problem in
,
2004
.
[7]
Gregory D. Hager,et al.
Real-Time Regularized Ultrasound Elastography
,
2011,
IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.
[8]
M. Fink,et al.
Breast lesions: quantitative elastography with supersonic shear imaging--preliminary results.
,
2010,
Radiology.
[9]
Nahil Sobh,et al.
Indentation Measurements to Validate Dynamic Elasticity Imaging Methods
,
2016,
Ultrasonic imaging.
[10]
Jamshid Ghaboussi,et al.
New nested adaptive neural networks (NANN) for constitutive modeling
,
1998
.
[11]
Jamshid Ghaboussi,et al.
Autoprogressive training of neural network constitutive models
,
1998
.
[12]
A. Oberai,et al.
Uniqueness of inverse problems of isotropic incompressible three-dimensional elasticity
,
2014
.