| Title |
Models and tissue mimics for brain shift simulations
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10237-017-0958-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Antonio E. Forte, Stefano Galvan, Daniele Dini |
| Abstract |
Capturing the deformation of human brain during neurosurgical operations is an extremely important task to improve the accuracy or surgical procedure and minimize permanent damage in patients. This study focuses on the development of an accurate numerical model for the prediction of brain shift during surgical procedures and employs a tissue mimic recently developed to capture the complexity of the human tissue. The phantom, made of a composite hydrogel, was designed to reproduce the dynamic mechanical behaviour of the brain tissue in a range of strain rates suitable for surgical procedures. The use of a well-controlled, accessible and MRI compatible alternative to real brain tissue allows us to rule out spurious effects due to patient geometry and tissue properties variability, CSF amount uncertainties, and head orientation. The performance of different constitutive descriptions is evaluated using a brain-skull mimic, which enables 3D deformation measurements by means of MRI scans. Our combined experimental and numerical investigation demonstrates the importance of using accurate constitutive laws when approaching the modelling of this complex organic tissue and supports the proposal of a hybrid poro-hyper-viscoelastic material formulation for the simulation of brain shift. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 66 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 12 | 18% |
| Researcher | 12 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Unknown | 17 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 27 | 41% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 9% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 3% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 26 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 September 2017.
All research outputs
#16,069,695
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology
#285
of 486 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#200,616
of 317,355 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology
#6
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 486 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,355 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.