MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2130348871 · doi:10.1136/heartjnl-2012-302074

Accuracy of aortic annular measurements obtained from three-dimensional echocardiography, CT and MRI: human in vitro and in vivo studies

2012· article· en· W2130348871 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Wendy Tsang, Michael G. Bateman, Lynn Weinert, Victor Mor‐Avi, Lissa Sugeng, Hubert Yeung, Amit R. Patel, Alexander J. Hill, Paul A. Iaizzo, Roberto M. Lang

Bibliographic record

VenueHeart · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineIn vivoRadiologyCardiologyInternal medicineNuclear medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To determine the accuracy of calcium-containing rings measurements imaged by three-dimensional echocardiography (3DE), multi-slice CT (MSCT) and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) under ideal conditions against the true ring dimensions. To compare the accuracy of aortic annulus (AoA) measurements in ex vivo human hearts using 3DE, MSCT and CMR. To determine the accuracy of AoA measurements in an in vivo human model. DESIGN: 3DE, MSCT and CMR imaging were performed on 30 calcium-containing rings and 28 explanted human hearts. Additionally, 15 human subjects with clinical indication for MSCT underwent 3DE. Two experts in each modality measured the images. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Bias and intraclass correlation coefficient for accuracy of imaging measurements when compared with actual ring dimensions. Bias, intraclass correlation coefficient and variability were obtained: (1) when comparing explanted human heart AoA measurements from the two remaining imaging modalities with the most accurate one as determined from the ring measurements and (2) in in vivo human AoA measurements. Analysis was repeated on explanted heart subgroups divided by aortic valve Agatston score. RESULTS: Against the known ring dimensions, CMR had the highest accuracy and the lowest variability. MSCT measurements had high accuracy but wider variability and 3DE had the lowest accuracy with the largest variability. When 3DE and MSCT were compared with CMR, 3DE underestimated and MSCT overestimated AoA dimensions, but inter-measurement variability of 3DE and MSCT were similar. When divided by Agatston score, both 3DE and MSCT measurements were larger and showed greater variability with increasing calcium burden. The in vivo study showed that the correlation between 3DE and MSCT measurements was high; however, 3DE measurements were smaller than those measured with MSCT. CONCLUSIONS: In the in vitro model, CMR measurements were the most accurate for assessing the actual dimensions suggesting that further investigations on its role in AoA measurement in TAVR are needed. However from the in vivo model, MSCT and 3DE are reasonable alternatives with the understanding that they can slightly overestimate and underestimate annular dimensions, respectively.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.316 · 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

Citations94
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeartSame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207