Journal: bioRxiv

Article Title: 3D vascular quantitation with application to computational modeling: a pre-clinical light sheet microscopy, high resolution ultrasound, nano-computed tomography comparison study

doi: 10.64898/2026.03.13.711685

Figure Lengend Snippet: (A) Representative cross-sectional areas of the later half of the PAAs towards the dorsal root by modality and their representative 3D anatomical model. (B) PAA lumen volume measured from individual models constructed with each imaging modality, scaled by PAA length ratio across modalities. (C-D) cross-section (C) area (scaled based on arch length) and (D) ellipticity measured at various points along the PAAs from individual models of each modality. (E) OFT branching angle, the angle between the common OFT and the septated OFT branches (F) Angle of OFT rotation, the tilt of the AO-PM axis from the cranial-caudal axis of the embryo. LSFM: light sheet fluorescence microscopy, 4DUS: four-dimensional ultrasound, nanoCT: nano computed tomography, PAA: pharyngeal arch arteries, OFT: outflow tract, AO: aortic trunk, PM: pulmonary trunk. Data in (B,E,F) are presented as mean ± standard deviation, and p -values are indicated where statistical significances are found ( p < 0.05, paired t -test for LSFM vs. 4DUS, Welch’s t -test for LSFM vs. nanoCT). Data in (C,D) are presented as mean ± standard error. See - for individual replicate embryo data and statistical analysis.

Article Snippet: PAA models derived from nanoCT were reconstructed via MIMICS (Materialise), 3MATICs (Materialise) and Geomagics Studio 10 (Geomagic) as described in .

Techniques: Construct, Imaging, Fluorescence, Microscopy, Computed Tomography, Standard Deviation

Journal: bioRxiv

Article Title: 3D vascular quantitation with application to computational modeling: a pre-clinical light sheet microscopy, high resolution ultrasound, nano-computed tomography comparison study

doi: 10.64898/2026.03.13.711685

Figure Lengend Snippet: (A) Peak flow pressure and WSS maps calculated from subject-specific simulation results in one representative PAA geometry for each modality. The 4DUS and LSFM models are of the same embryo. (B) Flow split across the six PAA branches for each imaging modality. Data presented as population mean ± standard deviation ( n = 5). (C-D) Cross-sectional average time-maximum pressure (C) and WSS (D) along each arch, normalized to the average values of each metric along the corresponding arch. LSFM: light sheet fluorescence microscopy, 4DUS: four-dimensional ultrasound, nanoCT: nano computed tomography, WSS: wall shear stress. Data in (B) are presented as mean ± standard deviation, and p -values are indicated where statistical significances are found ( p < 0.05, paired t -test for LSFM vs. 4DUS, Welch’s t -test for LSFM vs. nanoCT). Data in (C,D) are presented as mean ± standard error. See supplemental figures S6-7 for individual replicate embryo data and statistical analysis.

Article Snippet: PAA models derived from nanoCT were reconstructed via MIMICS (Materialise), 3MATICs (Materialise) and Geomagics Studio 10 (Geomagic) as described in .

Techniques: Imaging, Standard Deviation, Fluorescence, Microscopy, Computed Tomography, Shear