ArticleScientific reports2026
MR-based skull parametric modeling for blood-brain barrier opening in non-human primates.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Focused ultrasound (FUS) transcranial procedures require of simulation planning using the computed tomography (CT) of the skull, leading to ionizing radiation. Zero echo time (ZTE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a safe alternative for blood-brain barrier opening (BBBO) planning in non-human primates (NHP), with good contrast for bone imaging. In this study, we applied a classical coordinate-to-coordinate linear-regression method to obtain the ZTE-to-CT relationship for six NHP skulls. First, we compared ZTE-based (pseudo-CT/pCT) and CT-based simulations ex-vivo, with differences of [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text] mm and [Formula: see text] mm for the focal volume, attenuation, axial and lateral shifts, respectively. The differences between pCT simulations and experiments were [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text] mm and [Formula: see text] mm for the focal attenuation, axial and lateral shifts, respectively. Finally, pCT-based and CT-based simulations for in-vivo planning resulted in differences of [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text] mm and [Formula: see text] for the focal volume, attenuation, in-focus BBBO volume, sonicated skull thickness, and Skull Density Ratio, respectively, where pCT and CT predicted a [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] of BBBO volume, respectively. These results demonstrate for the first time the feasibility of a ZTE-to-CT skull modeling method for BBBO planning in NHPs, defining a fully non-ionizing planning technique for transcranial FUS applications.
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.