MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062945418 · doi:10.1118/1.3056458

Nonrigid registration of three‐dimensional ultrasound and magnetic resonance images of the carotid arteries

2009· article· en· W2062945418 on OpenAlexafffund
Nuwan D. Nanayakkara, Bernard Chiu, Abbas Samani, J. David Spence, Jagath Samarabandu, Grace Párraga, Aaron Fenster

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical TrialsWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsMagnetic resonance imagingMedicineUltrasoundStenosisImage registrationRadiologyMedical imagingStroke (engine)Biomedical engineeringArtificial intelligenceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Atherosclerosis at the carotid bifurcation can result in cerebral emboli, which in turn can block the blood supply to the brain causing ischemic strokes. Noninvasive imaging tools that better characterize arterial wall, and atherosclerotic plaque structure and composition may help to determine the factors which lead to the development of unstable lesions, and identify patients at risk of plaque disruption and stroke. Carotid magnetic resonance (MR) imaging allows for the characterization of carotid vessel wall and plaque composition, the characterization of normal and pathological arterial wall, the quantification of plaque size, and the detection of plaque integrity. On the other hand, various ultrasound (US) measurements have also been used to quantify atherosclerosis, carotid stenosis, intima-media thickness, total plaque volume, total plaque area, and vessel wall volume. Combining the complementary information provided by 3D MR and US carotid images may lead to a better understanding of the underlying compositional and textural factors that define plaque and wall vulnerability, which may lead to better and more effective stroke prevention strategies and patient management. Combining these images requires nonrigid registration to correct the nonlinear misalignments caused by relative twisting and bending in the neck due to different head positions during the two image acquisition sessions. The high degree of freedom and large number of parameters associated with existing nonrigid image registration methods causes several problems including unnatural plaque morphology alteration, high computational complexity, and low reliability. Thus, a "twisting and bending" model was used with only six parameters to model the normal movement of the neck for nonrigid registration. The registration technique was evaluated using 3D US and MR carotid images at two field strengths, 1.5 and 3.0 T, of the same subject acquired on the same day. The mean registration error between the segmented carotid artery wall boundaries in the target US image and the registered MR images was calculated using a distance-based error metric after applying a "twisting and bending" model based nonrigid registration algorithm. An average registration error of 1.4 +/- 0.3 mm was obtained for 1.5 T MR and 1.5 +/- 0.4 mm for 3.0 T MR, when registered with 3D US images using the nonrigid registration technique presented in this paper. Visual inspection of segmented vessel surfaces also showed a substantial improvement of alignment with this nonrigid registration technique compared to rigid registration.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.232
Threshold uncertainty score0.220

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations23
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery DiseasesFrench-language works237,207