Identification of surgically-induced longitudinal lesions of the equine deep digital flexor tendon in the digital flexor tendon sheath using contrast-enhanced ultrasonography: an ex-vivo pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Longitudinal tears in the lateral aspect of the deep digital flexor tendon are the most common causes of pain localised to the equine digital flexor tendon sheath. However conventional ultrasonographic techniques provide limited information about acute lesions. Ultrasonographic contrast agents are newly developed materials that have contributed to advancement in human diagnostic imaging. They are currently approved for intravenous use in human and animal models. In this study we described intrathecal use in the horse. This study was undertaken to evaluate the reliability of standard and angle contrast-enhanced ultrasonography to detect and characterize surgically-induced longitudinal lesions in the deep digital flexor tendons.In this pilot study surgically-induced lesions were created in the lateral aspect of the deep digital flexor tendon within the digital flexor tendon sheath in 10 isolated equine limbs to generate a replicable model for naturally occurring lesions. Another 10 specimens were sham operated. All the limbs were examined ultrasonographically before and shortly after the intrasynovial injection of an ultrasound contrast agent containing stabilised microbubbles. The images were blindly evaluated to detect the ability to identify surgically-created lesions. The deep digital flexor tendons were dissected and a series of slices were obtained. The depth of longitudinal defects identified with contrast-enhanced ultrasound scans was compared to the real extent of the lesions measured in the corresponding gross tendon sections. RESULTS: Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography with both angle and standard approach provided a significant higher proportion of correct diagnoses compared to standard and angle contrast ultrasonography (p < 0.01). Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography reliably estimated the depth of surgically-induced longitudinal lesions in the deep digital flexor tendons. CONCLUSION: Contrast-enhanced ultrasound of the digital flexor tendon sheath could be an effective tool to detect intrasynovial longitudinal tears of the deep digital flexor tendon, although an in vivo study is required to confirm these results for naturally occurring lesions.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".