ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Automated Extraction of Pulsatile Stiffness and Wall Asymmetry from Aortic M-Mode Ultrasound Images.
Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Conventional ultrasound-based assessment of aortic stiffness relies on two-point distension metrics using maximum and minimum vessel diameters within a cardiac cycle, which may not fully reflect time-resolved aortic wall dynamics. This retrospective pilot study investigated the feasibility and clinical relevance of a time-series-based stiffness parameter, termed pulsatile stiffness-β, derived from automated segmentation of archived aortic M-mode ultrasound images. Seventy-nine cases with available aortic M-mode images were analyzed. Automated image processing was used to segment the anterior and posterior aortic walls and reconstruct diameter waveforms. Conventional stiffness-β, pulsatile stiffness-β, and wall asymmetry-related parameters were calculated and compared with demographic, tonometry-derived, hemodynamic, coronary burden, cardiovascular risk, and echocardiographic variables. Conventional and pulsatile stiffness-β were strongly correlated and showed directionally consistent associations with established vascular functional parameters, including systolic blood pressure, pulse pressure, augmentation pressure, age, and cardiovascular risk burden. Pulsatile stiffness-β demonstrated association patterns broadly comparable to conventional stiffness-β, suggesting its role as a waveform-informed extension rather than a superior alternative. Wall asymmetry-related parameters were associated with the Syntax score. Automated analysis of archived aortic M-mode images may provide feasible time-resolved vascular biomarkers for stiffness and wall motion assessment.
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.