Nonrigid registration of three‐dimensional ultrasound and magnetic resonance images of the carotid arteries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".