MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152761292 · doi:10.1148/radiol.2471070711

Renal Artery Stenosis Evaluation: Diagnostic Performance of Gadobenate Dimeglumine–enhanced MR Angiography—Comparison with DSA

2008· article· en· W2152761292 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal and Vascular Pathologies
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalFonds de Recherche du Québec - Santé
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDigital subtraction angiographyRenal artery stenosisStenosisRadiologyAngiographyRenal arteryMagnetic resonance angiographyLumen (anatomy)Kidney diseaseMagnetic resonance imagingKidneyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To prospectively determine diagnostic performance and safety of contrast material-enhanced (CE) magnetic resonance (MR) angiography with 0.1 mmol per kilogram of body weight gadobenate dimeglumine for depiction of significant steno-occlusive disease (> or =51% stenosis) of renal arteries, with digital subtraction angiography (DSA) as reference standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multicenter study was approved by local institutional review boards; all patients provided written informed consent. Patient enrollment and examination at centers in the United States complied with HIPAA. Two hundred ninety-three patients (154 men, 139 women; mean age, 61.0 years) with severe hypertension (82.2%), progressive renal failure (11.3%), and suspected renal artery stenosis (6.5%) underwent CE MR angiography with three-dimensional spoiled gradient-echo sequences after administration of 0.1 mmol/kg gadobenate dimeglumine at 2 mL/sec. Anteroposterior and oblique DSA was performed in 268 (91.5%) patients. Three independent blinded reviewers evaluated CE MR angiographic images. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of CE MR angiography for detection of significant steno-occlusive disease (> or =51% vessel lumen narrowing) were determined at segment (main renal artery) and patient levels. Positive and negative predictive values and positive and negative likelihood ratios were determined. Interobserver agreement was analyzed with generalized kappa statistics. A safety evaluation (clinical examination, electrocardiogram, blood and urine analysis, monitoring for adverse events) was performed. RESULTS: Of 268 patients, 178 who were evaluated with MR angiography and DSA had significant steno-occlusive disease of renal arteries at DSA. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of CE MR angiography for detection of 51% or greater stenosis or occlusion were 60.1%-84.1%, 89.4%-94.7%, and 80.4%-86.9%, respectively, at segment level. Similar values were obtained for predictive values and for patient-level analyses. Few CE MR angiographic examinations (1.9%-2.8%) were technically inadequate. Interobserver agreement for detection of significant steno-occlusive disease was good (79.9% agreement; kappa = 0.69). No safety concerns were noted. CONCLUSION: CE MR angiography performed with 0.1 mmol/kg gadobenate dimeglumine, compared with DSA, is safe and provides good sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for detection of significant renal artery steno-occlusive disease.

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.

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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.460

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.239 · 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