Neuronavigation using susceptibility-weighted venography: application to deep brain stimulation and comparison with gadolinium contrast
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Careful trajectory planning on preoperative vascular imaging is an essential step in deep brain stimulation (DBS) to minimize risks of hemorrhagic complications and postoperative neurological deficits. This paper compares 2 MRI methods for visualizing cerebral vasculature and planning DBS probe trajectories: a single data set T1-weighted scan with double-dose gadolinium contrast (T1w-Gd) and a multi-data set protocol consisting of a T1-weighted structural, susceptibility-weighted venography, and time-of-flight angiography (T1w-SWI-TOF). Two neurosurgeons who specialize in neuromodulation surgery planned bilateral STN DBS in 18 patients with Parkinson's disease (36 hemispheres) using each protocol separately. Planned trajectories were then evaluated across all vascular data sets (T1w-Gd, SWI, and TOF) to detect possible intersection with blood vessels along the entire path via an objective vesselness measure. The authors' results show that trajectories planned on T1w-SWI-TOF successfully avoided the cerebral vasculature imaged by conventional T1w-Gd and did not suffer from missing vascular information or imprecise data set registration. Furthermore, with appropriate planning and visualization software, trajectory corridors planned on T1w-SWI-TOF intersected significantly less fine vasculature that was not detected on the T1w-Gd (p < 0.01 within 2 mm and p < 0.001 within 4 mm of the track centerline). The proposed T1w-SWI-TOF protocol comes with minimal effects on the imaging and surgical workflow, improves vessel avoidance, and provides a safe cost-effective alternative to injection of gadolinium contrast.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".