6F-4 Ultrasound Elastography for the Non-invasive Healing Follow-Up of Abdominal Aneurysms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we propose to characterize the aneurysmal sac components and to follow the healing process after endovascular treatment of the aneurysm with a stent graft (SG). The study was performed on 11 dogs with bilateral aneurysms surgically created on iliac arteries. The healing process was evaluated on digital subtraction angiography, color Doppler display and ultrasound (US) elastography, 3 months after implantation of the SG. The elastography algorithms used are a 1D scaling factor approach, improved to avoid low signal-to-noise artifacts, and a 2D Lagrangian algorithm. Elastograms provided complementary information to other imaging modalities for healed cases (low pulsatility and aneurysmal sac filled with a solid thrombus), and for unhealed cases (endoleak in the sac associated with a high pulsatility), but unique findings were present when the aneurysm was incompletely healed. In conclusion, we found that ultrasound elastography is a good exam complementary to B-scan and Doppler to characterize aneurysms following endovascular repair
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".