MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Virtual Fluoroscopy: Computer-Assisted Fluoroscopic Navigation

2001· article· en· W2089279779 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFluoroscopyMedicineCadaverVirtual imageDosimeterNuclear medicineComputer visionRadiologyComputer scienceSurgeryDosimetry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: In vitro accuracy assessment of a novel virtual fluoroscopy system. OBJECTIVES: To investigate a new technology combining image-guided surgery with C-arm fluoroscopy. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Fluoroscopy is a useful and familiar technology to all musculoskeletal surgeons. Its limitations include radiation exposure to the patient and operating team and the need to reposition the fluoroscope repeatedly to obtain surgical guidance in multiple planes. METHODS: Fluoroscopic images of the lumbar spine of an intact, unembalmed cadaver were obtained, calibrated, and saved to an ). A was used for the sequential insertion of a light-emitting diode-fitted probe into the pedicles of L1-S1 bilaterally. The trajectory of a "virtual tool" corresponding to the tracked tool was overlaid onto the saved fluoroscopic views in real time. Live fluoroscopic images of the inserted pedicle probe were then obtained. Distances between the tips of the virtual and fluoroscopically displayed probes were quantified using the image-guided computer's measurement tool. Trajectory angle differences were measured using a standard goniometer and printed copies of the workstation computer display. The surgeon's radiation exposure was measured using thermolucent dosimeter rings. RESULTS: Excellent correlation between the virtual fluoroscopic images and live fluoroscopy was observed. Mean probe tip error was 0.97 +/- 0.40 mm. Mean trajectory angle difference between the virtual and fluoroscopically displayed probes was 2.7 degrees +/- 0.6 degrees. The thermolucent dosimeter rings measured no detectable radiation exposure for the surgeon. CONCLUSIONS: Virtual fluoroscopy offers several advantages over conventional fluoroscopy while providing acceptable targeting accuracy. It enables a single C-arm to provide real-time, multiplanar procedural guidance. It also dramatically reduces radiation exposure to the patient and surgical team by eliminating the need for repetitive fluoroscopic imaging for tool placement.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.654
Threshold uncertainty score0.449

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.293 · 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