SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Zero echo time imaging-based skull density ratio for high-intensity focused ultrasound.

Int J Hyperthermia · 2026-09-01

DOI: 10.1080/02656736.2026.2706720PMID: 42677918

Check source for accessJournal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

PurposeTo evaluate whether skull density ratio (SDR) estimates required for high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) treatment of tremor can be accurately derived from zero echo time (ZTE) magnetic resonance images (MRI) by comparing them with measurements from computed tomography (CT) scans using an intensity profile-based approach.Materials and methodsFifty-seven patients with essential tremor (n = 44), Parkinson's disease (PD) tremor (n = 10), both (n = 1) or uncategorized tremor-dominant disease (n = 2), underwent ZTE imaging before a neuro-HIFU treatment. Skull attenuation estimates, i.e. skull density ratios, were calculated from ZTE and CT images using the developed in-house SDR calculation pipeline and compared with the vendor-provided benchmark SDR values. To statistically evaluate the linear relationships between the datasets, Pearson correlation coefficients (r) and their corresponding p-values were calculated. A novel ZTE-based SDR inclusion threshold was derived.ResultsA statistically significant positive correlation (r = 0.96, pr = 0.80, pConclusionsTo our knowledge, this research was the first to take an intensity-profile-based approach when comparing high-resolution ZTE images and CT scans for skull density ratio calculation. The findings of this study support the possibility of the zero echo time sequence being validated for clinical use.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.