MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149585956 · doi:10.1148/radiol.12111194

MR Thermometry Analysis of Sonication Accuracy and Safety Margin of Volumetric MR Imaging–guided High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound Ablation of Symptomatic Uterine Fibroids

2012· article· en· W2149585956 on OpenAlexaff
Youngsun Kim, Hervé Trillaud, Hyunchul Rhim, Hyo Keun Lim, Willem P.Th.M. Mali, Marianne J. Voogt, Jörg Barkhausen, Thomas Eckey, Max O. Köhler, Bilgin Keserci, Charles Mougenot, Shunmugavelu Sokka, Jouko Soini, Heikki J. Nieminen

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUterine Myomas and Treatments
Canadian institutionsPhilips (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAblationUltrasoundHigh-intensity focused ultrasoundNuclear medicineMagnetic resonance imagingUterine fibroidsIntensity (physics)Ablation zoneRadiologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy of the size and location of the ablation zone produced by volumetric magnetic resonance (MR) imaging-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation of uterine fibroids on the basis of MR thermometric analysis and to assess the effects of a feedback control technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective study was approved by the institutional review board, and written informed consent was obtained. Thirty-three women with 38 uterine fibroids were treated with an MR imaging-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound system capable of volumetric feedback ablation. Size (diameter times length) and location (three-dimensional displacements) of each ablation zone induced by 527 sonications (with [n=471] and without [n=56] feedback) were analyzed according to the thermal dose obtained with MR thermometry. Prospectively defined acceptance ranges of targeting accuracy were ±5 mm in left-right (LR) and craniocaudal (CC) directions and ±12 mm in anteroposterior (AP) direction. Effects of feedback control in 8- and 12-mm treatment cells were evaluated by using a mixed model with repeated observations within patients. RESULTS: Overall mean sizes of ablation zones produced by 4-, 8-, 12-, and 16-mm treatment cells (with and without feedback) were 4.6 mm±1.4 (standard deviation)×4.4 mm±4.8 (n=13), 8.9 mm±1.9×20.2 mm±6.5 (n=248), 13.0 mm±1.2×29.1 mm±5.6 (n=234), and 18.1 mm±1.4×38.2 mm±7.6 (n=32), respectively. Targeting accuracy values (displacements in absolute values) were 0.9 mm±0.7, 1.2 mm±0.9, and 2.8 mm±2.2 in LR, CC, and AP directions, respectively. Of 527 sonications, 99.8% (526 of 527) were within acceptance ranges. Feedback control had no statistically significant effect on targeting accuracy or ablation zone size. However, variations in ablation zone size were smaller in the feedback control group. CONCLUSION: Sonication accuracy of volumetric MR imaging-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation of uterine fibroids appears clinically acceptable and may be further improved by feedback control to produce more consistent ablation zones.

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 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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.440

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations41
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiologySame topicUterine Myomas and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207