MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127754037 · doi:10.1118/1.598942

Intraoperative ultrasound for guidance and tissue shift correction in image‐guided neurosurgery

2000· article· en· W2127754037 on OpenAlexaff
Roch M. Comeau, Abbas F. Sadikot, Aaron Fenster, Terry M. Peters

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImaging phantomModality (human–computer interaction)Image-guided surgeryMedicineUltrasoundComputer visionMedical imagingNeurosurgeryArtificial intelligenceCraniotomyIntraoperative MRIComputer scienceRadiologyMagnetic resonance imagingInterventional magnetic resonance imaging

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a surgical guidance system that incorporates pre-operative image information (e.g., MRI) with intraoperative ultrasound (US) imaging to detect and correct for brain tissue deformation during image-guided neurosurgery (IGNS). Many interactive IGNS implementations employ pre-operative images as a guide to the surgeons throughout the procedure. However, when a craniotomy is involved, tissue movement during a procedure can be a significant source of error in these systems. By incorporating intraoperative US imaging, the target volume can be scanned at any time, and two-dimensional US images may be compared directly to the corresponding slice from the pre-operative image. Homologous points may be mapped from the intraoperative to the pre-operative image space with an accuracy of better than 2 mm, enabling the surgeon to use this information to assess the accuracy of the guidance system along with the progress of the procedure (e.g., extent of lesion removal) at any time during the operation. Anatomical features may be identified on both the pre-operative and intraoperative images and used to generate a deformation map, which can be used to warp the pre-operative image to match the intraoperative US image. System validation is achieved using a deformable multi-modality imaging phantom, and preliminary clinical results are presented.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations250
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicMedical Image Segmentation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207