ReviewVisual computing for industry, biomedicine, and art2026
Advances in photoacoustic imaging reconstruction and quantitative analysis for biomedical applications.
Review in Visual computing for industry, biomedicine, and art, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- 4D nanoimaging-guided smart therapeutics: spatiotemporal control of disease microenvironments.RSC advances · 2026Review
- A comparative study of diffusion-based reconstruction frameworks for photoacoustic tomography.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Quantitative photoacoustic evaluation of graded ischemic stroke and the therapeutic efficacy of low-intensity transcranial ultrasound stimulation.Biomedical optics express · 2026Article
- Potential of Silver Nanoparticles in Imaging Diagnostics and Image-Guided Applications: A Narrative Review.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Photoacoustic Imaging for Women's Gynecological Health: Advances and Clinical Prospects.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Recent Advances in Near-Infrared Cyanine Dye-Based Fluorescent Nanoprobes for Tumor Imaging and Therapy.International journal of nanomedicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Photoacoustic imaging (PAI), a modality that combines the high contrast of optical imaging with the deep penetration of ultrasound, is rapidly transitioning from preclinical research to clinical practice. However, its widespread clinical adoption faces challenges such as the inherent trade-off between penetration depth and spatial resolution, along with the demand for faster imaging speeds. This review comprehensively examines the fundamental principles of PAI, focusing on three primary implementations: photoacoustic computed tomography, photoacoustic microscopy, and photoacoustic endoscopy. It critically analyzes their respective advantages and limitations to provide insights into practical applications. The discussion then extends to recent advancements in image reconstruction and artifact suppression, where both conventional and deep learning (DL)-based approaches have been highlighted for their role in enhancing image quality and streamlining workflows. Furthermore, this work explores progress in quantitative PAI, particularly its ability to precisely measure hemoglobin concentration, oxygen saturation, and other physiological biomarkers. Finally, this review outlines emerging trends and future directions, underscoring the transformative potential of DL in shaping the clinical evolution of PAI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.