MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1602302494 · doi:10.1118/1.4926428

Image‐based reconstruction of three‐dimensional myocardial infarct geometry for patient‐specific modeling of cardiac electrophysiology

2015· article· en· W1602302494 on OpenAlexaff
Eranga Ukwatta, Hermenegild Arevalo, Martin Rajchl, James A. White, Farhad Pashakhanloo, Adityo Prakosa, Daniel A. Herzka, Elliot R. McVeigh, Albert C. Lardo, Natalia A. Trayanova, Fijoy Vadakkumpadan

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersDivision of Chemical, Bioengineering, Environmental, and Transport SystemsNational Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health PromotionNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteJohns Hopkins UniversityAmerican Heart AssociationNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMyocardial infarctionMedicineMagnetic resonance imagingArtificial intelligenceIterative reconstructionComputer scienceComputer visionBiomedical engineeringPattern recognition (psychology)RadiologyCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Accurate three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction of myocardial infarct geometry is crucial to patient-specific modeling of the heart aimed at providing therapeutic guidance in ischemic cardiomyopathy. However, myocardial infarct imaging is clinically performed using two-dimensional (2D) late-gadolinium enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance (LGE-CMR) techniques, and a method to build accurate 3D infarct reconstructions from the 2D LGE-CMR images has been lacking. The purpose of this study was to address this need. METHODS: The authors developed a novel methodology to reconstruct 3D infarct geometry from segmented low-resolution (Lo-res) clinical LGE-CMR images. Their methodology employed the so-called logarithm of odds (LogOdds) function to implicitly represent the shape of the infarct in segmented image slices as LogOdds maps. These 2D maps were then interpolated into a 3D image, and the result transformed via the inverse of LogOdds to a binary image representing the 3D infarct geometry. To assess the efficacy of this method, the authors utilized 39 high-resolution (Hi-res) LGE-CMR images, including 36 in vivo acquisitions of human subjects with prior myocardial infarction and 3 ex vivo scans of canine hearts following coronary ligation to induce infarction. The infarct was manually segmented by trained experts in each slice of the Hi-res images, and the segmented data were downsampled to typical clinical resolution. The proposed method was then used to reconstruct 3D infarct geometry from the downsampled images, and the resulting reconstructions were compared with the manually segmented data. The method was extensively evaluated using metrics based on geometry as well as results of electrophysiological simulations of cardiac sinus rhythm and ventricular tachycardia in individual hearts. Several alternative reconstruction techniques were also implemented and compared with the proposed method. RESULTS: The accuracy of the LogOdds method in reconstructing 3D infarct geometry, as measured by the Dice similarity coefficient, was 82.10% ± 6.58%, a significantly higher value than those of the alternative reconstruction methods. Among outcomes of electrophysiological simulations with infarct reconstructions generated by various methods, the simulation results corresponding to the LogOdds method showed the smallest deviation from those corresponding to the manual reconstructions, as measured by metrics based on both activation maps and pseudo-ECGs. CONCLUSIONS: The authors have developed a novel method for reconstructing 3D infarct geometry from segmented slices of Lo-res clinical 2D LGE-CMR images. This method outperformed alternative approaches in reproducing expert manual 3D reconstructions and in electrophysiological simulations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.755
Threshold uncertainty score0.569

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.245 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations50
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207