A high-resolution pediatric female whole-body numerical model with comparison to a male model

2022 · Unclear · Insufficient evidence

← Research stream

UnclearInsufficient evidencePaper 598

Study snapshot

Publicationmanual · 2022

Study typeengineering

Reported directionUnclear

Evidence ratingInsufficient

Abstract

A high-resolution pediatric female whole-body numerical model with comparison to a male model Ntolkeras G, Jeong H, Zollei L, Dmytriw AA, Purvaziri A, Lev MH, Grant PE, Bonmassar G. A high-resolution pediatric female whole-body numerical model with comparison to a male model. Phys Med Biol. 2022 Dec 6. doi: 10.1088/1361-6560/aca950. Abstract Objective: Numerical models are central in designing and testing novel medical devices and in studying how different anatomical changes may affect physiology. Despite the numerous adult models available, there are only a few whole-body pediatric numerical models with significant limitations. In addition, there is a limited representation of both male and female biological sexes in the available pediatric models despite the fact that sex significantly affects body development, especially in a highly dynamic population. As a result, we developed Athena, a realistic female whole-body pediatric numerical model with high-resolution and anatomical detail. Approach: We segmented different body tissues through Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and Computed Tomography (CT) images of a healthy 3.5-year-old female child using 3D Slicer. We validated the high anatomical accuracy segmentation through two experienced sub-specialty-certified neuro-radiologists and the inter and intra-operator variability of the segmentation results comparing sex differences in organ metrics with physiologic values. Finally, we compared Athena with Martin, a similar male model, showing differences in anatomy, organ metrics, and MRI dosimetric exposure. Main results: We segmented 267 tissue compartments, which included 50 brain tissue labels. The tissue metrics of Athena displayed no deviation from the literature value of healthy children. We show the variability of brain metrics in the male and female models. Finally, we offer an example of computing Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) and Joule heating in a toddler/preschooler at 7T MRI. Significance: This study introduces a female realistic high-resolution numerical model using MRI and CT scans of a 3.5-year-old female child, the use of which includes but is not limited to radiofrequency safety studies for medical devices (e.g., an implantable medical device safety in MRI), neurostimulation studies, and radiation dosimetry studies. This model will be open source and available on the Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging website. Open access paper: iopscience.iop.org

Machine Enhanced Logic

AI evidence extraction

Structured fields below were generated from the paper’s abstract and metadata to make the evidence easier to inspect. Automated extraction may be incomplete or incorrect; verify important details against the original paper.

Study typeengineering

Effect directionunclear

PopulationHealthy 3.5-year-old female child (numerical whole-body model) with comparison to a male pediatric model

Sample sizeNot supplied

ExposureRF

Evidence strengthInsufficientConfidence: 74% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

The authors developed a high-resolution whole-body pediatric female numerical model (Athena) segmented into 267 tissue compartments (including 50 brain tissue labels) with tissue metrics showing no deviation from literature values for healthy children. They compared Athena to a similar male model (Martin), reporting variability/differences in brain metrics and providing an example calculation of SAR and Joule heating for a toddler/preschooler at 7T MRI.

Outcomes measured

Development of high-resolution pediatric female whole-body numerical model (Athena)
Anatomical/organ tissue metrics and sex differences in organ/brain metrics (model comparison)
MRI dosimetry example: Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) and Joule heating at 7T MRI

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "engineering",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "RF",
    "source": "MRI",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": null
  },
  "population": "Healthy 3.5-year-old female child (numerical whole-body model) with comparison to a male pediatric model",
  "sample_size": null,
  "outcomes": [
    "Development of high-resolution pediatric female whole-body numerical model (Athena)",
    "Anatomical/organ tissue metrics and sex differences in organ/brain metrics (model comparison)",
    "MRI dosimetry example: Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) and Joule heating at 7T MRI"
  ],
  "main_findings": "The authors developed a high-resolution whole-body pediatric female numerical model (Athena) segmented into 267 tissue compartments (including 50 brain tissue labels) with tissue metrics showing no deviation from literature values for healthy children. They compared Athena to a similar male model (Martin), reporting variability/differences in brain metrics and providing an example calculation of SAR and Joule heating for a toddler/preschooler at 7T MRI.",
  "effect_direction": "unclear",
  "limitations": [],
  "evidence_strength": "insufficient",
  "confidence": 0.74,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "pediatric",
    "female model",
    "whole-body numerical model",
    "MRI",
    "CT",
    "segmentation",
    "3D Slicer",
    "sex differences",
    "dosimetry",
    "specific absorption rate",
    "SAR",
    "Joule heating",
    "7T MRI",
    "radiofrequency safety",
    "implantable medical device"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "mri-rf-safety",
      "weight": 0.86,
      "reason": "Includes an example computation of SAR and Joule heating at 7T MRI and positions the model for RF safety studies in MRI."
    }
  ]
}

AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.

AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract and metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This material is for informational purposes and is not medical advice.

Identifiers and source

DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/aca950
PubMed: Not supplied

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library