{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03067484662576687, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0043821209465381246, 'mean_word_length': 5.415730337078652, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Carotid geometry reconstruction: a comparison between MRI and ultrasound.

Image-based Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) has become a popular tool for the prediction of in vivo flow profiles and hemodynamic wall parameters. Currently, Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is most widely used for in vivo geometry acquisition. For superficial arteries such as the carotids and the femoral artery, three-dimensional (3-D) extravascular ultrasound (3-DUS) could be a cost-effective alternative to MRI. In this study, nine healthy subjects were scanned both with MRI and 3-DUS. The reconstructed carotid artery geometries for each subject were compared by evaluating cross-sectional areas, centerlines, and carotid nonplanarity. Lumen areas agreed very well between the two different acquisition techniques, whereas centerlines and nonplanarity parameters showed measurable disagreement, possibly due to the different neck and head positions adopted for 3-DUS versus MRI. With the current level of agreement achieved, 3-DUS has the potential to become an inexpensive and fast alternative to MRI for image-based CFD modeling of superficial arteries.