PuSH - Publikationsserver des Helmholtz Zentrums München: Comparison of biomechanical breast models: A case study.

Informationen

Hinweise zu Qualitätskriterien von Zeitschriften

Open-Access-Richtlinie der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft 2016

CC Licencences

Metriken für Publikationen

Navigation

Startseite

English

EVA: Veröffentlichen

Neuer EVA Antrag

Recherche

Erweiterte Suche

Durchblättern nach ...

... HMGU-Autoren/Konsortien

... Organisationsstruktur

... Zeitschriften

... Publikationstypen

... Forschungsdaten

... Arbeitsgruppen

... Erscheinungsjahr

Publikationen im Überblick

Statistik

HGF Fortschrittsbericht

OA Publikationen

Eintragen

Neue Publikation eintragen

Neue Publikation holen aus...

...EVA

Fehlende Publikation melden

Highlights

Suche

Hilfe & Kontakt

Ansprechpartner

Hilfe

Datenschutz

Helmholtz Open Science

Bibliometrische Indikatoren

SHERPA/RoMEO

DOAJ

Export:

Text

Endnote (RIS) BIB

BibTeX

Tanner, C.* ; Degenhard, A.* ; Schnabel, J.A.* ; Castellano-Smith, A.D.* ; Hayes, C.* ; Sonoda, L.I.* ; Leach, M.O.* ; Hose, D.R.* ; Hill, D.L.G.* ; Hawkes, D.J.*

Comparison of biomechanical breast models: A case study.

Proc. SPIE 4684 III, 1807-1818 (2002)

Verlagsversion

DOI

	Licenced for HMGU

Open Access Green möglich sobald Postprint bei der ZB eingereicht worden ist.

Abstract
Metriken
Zusatzinfos

We present initial results from evaluating the accuracy with which biomechanical breast models based on finite element methods can predict the displacements of tissue within the breast. We investigate the influence of different tissue elasticity values, Poisson's ratios, boundary conditions, finite element solvers and mesh resolutions on one data set. MR images were acquired before and after compressing a volunteer's breast gently. These images were aligned using a 3D non-rigid registration algorithm. The boundary conditions were derived from the result of the non-rigid registration or by assuming no patient motion at the deep or medial side. Three linear and two non-linear elastic material models were tested. The accuracy of the BBMs was assessed by the Euclidean distance of twelve corresponding anatomical landmarks. Overall, none of the tested material models was obviously superior to another regarding the set of investigated values. A major average error increase was noted for partially inaccurate boundary conditions at high Poisson's ratios due to introduced volume change. Maximal errors remained, however, high for low Poisson's ratio due to the landmarks closeness to the inaccurate boundary conditions. The choice of finite element solver or mesh resolution had almost no effect on the performance outcome. © 2002 SPIE · 1605-7422/02/$15.00.

Impact Factor

Scopus SNIP

Scopus
Cited By

Altmetric

0.000

0.261