2D‐3D registration of coronary angiograms for cardiac procedure planning and guidance
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a completely automated 2D-3D registration technique that accurately maps a patient-specific heart model, created from preoperative images, to the patient's orientation in the operating room. This mapping is based on the registration of preoperatively acquired 3D vascular data with intraoperatively acquired angiograms. Registration using both single and dual-plane angiograms is explored using simulated but realistic datasets that were created from clinical images. Heart deformations and cardiac phase mismatches are taken into account in our validation using a digital 4D human heart model. In an ideal situation where the pre- and intraoperative images were acquired at identical time points within the cardiac cycle, the single-plane and the dual-plane registrations resulted in 3D root-mean-square (rms) errors of 1.60 +/- 0.21 and 0.53 +/- 0.08 mm, respectively. When a 10% timing offset was added between the pre- and the intraoperative acquisitions, the single-plane registration approach resulted in inaccurate registrations in the out-of-plane axis, whereas the dual-plane registration exhibited a 98% success rate with a 3D rms error of 1.33 +/- 0.28 mm. When all potential sources of error were included, namely, the anatomical background, timing offset, and typical errors in the vascular tree reconstruction, the dual-plane registration performed at 94% with an accuracy of 2.19 +/- 0.77 mm.
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.
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 it