MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101843403 · doi:10.1002/jmri.21063

MRI evaluation of microvascular obstruction in experimental reperfused acute myocardial infarction using a T1 and T2 preparation pulse sequence

2007· article· en· W2101843403 on OpenAlexaff
Yuesong Yang, Warren D. Foltz, John Graham, Jay Detsky, Alexander Dick, Graham A. Wright

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBolus (digestion)PerfusionNuclear medicineMagnetic resonance imagingMyocardial infarctionIntravenous bolusPulse (music)RadiologyCardiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To investigate a T1 and T2 preparation pulse sequence to evaluate microvascular obstruction (MO) in a porcine model of reperfused acute myocardial infarction (AMI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 14 pigs with reperfused AMI underwent MRI examinations at baseline and three to four hours after reperfusion. MRI scans included a left ventricular functional study, T1 and T2 measurement on a 1.5T MRI system. At reperfusion, first-pass myocardial perfusion (FPMP) images were obtained after bolus injection of gadopentetate dimeglumine followed by an intravenous drip. Delayed contrast-enhanced MRI (DE-MRI) and T1 measurements were performed 30 and 45 minutes, respectively, after the bolus, during a constant infusion of gadopentetate dimeglumine. RESULTS: In 11 pigs MO was hypoenhanced in FPMP and DE-MRI. In later T1 preparation difference images postcontrast, MO was hyperenhanced while delayed hyperenhanced (DHE) regions appeared dark. MO areas on DE-MRI and T1 images were comparable. T1 reduction (%) postcontrast in MO was small compared to measurements from DHE regions (P < 0.0001) and similar to those from control segments (P = 0.66). Precontrast T1 and T2 values at reperfusion from MO and DHE regions were larger than in control regions. CONCLUSION: Using T1 preparation under a constant gadopentetate dimeglumine (Gd-DTPA) infusion, delayed imaging at 30 to 45 minutes demonstrates MO as a positive contrast with larger T1 values. Elevated T1 and T2 values in MO precontrast may also help to differentiate them from both control and DHE regions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.339
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations8
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Magnetic Resonance ImagingSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207