MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

(1)H-MR imaging of the lungs at 3.0 T.

2016· article· en· W2291961541 on OpenAlexafffund
Sergei Obruchkov, Michael D. Noseworthy

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Subatomic Physics Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversitySt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonMcMaster University Medical Centre
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCardiac cycleNuclear medicinek-spaceMagnetic resonance imagingContrast-to-noise ratioMedicineCardiac magnetic resonance imagingLungBiomedical engineeringNuclear magnetic resonanceComputer sciencePhysicsRadiologyArtificial intelligenceCardiologyInternal medicineImage (mathematics)Image quality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: One disadvantage of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the inability to adequately image the lungs. Recent advances in hyperpolarized gas technology [e.g., helium-3 ((3)He) and xenon-129 ((129)Xe)] have changed this. However, the required technology is expensive and often needing extra physics or engineering staff. Hence there is considerable interest in developing (1)H (proton)-based MRI approaches that can be readily implemented on standard clinical systems. Thus, the purpose of this work was to compare a newly developed free breathing proton-based MR lung imaging method to that of a standard gadolinium (Gd) based perfusion approach. METHODS: Healthy volunteers [10] were scanned using a 3-T MRI with 8 parallel receivers, and a cardiac gated fast spin echo (FSE) sequence. Acquisition was cardiac triggered, with different time delays incremented to cover the entire cardiac cycle. Image k-space was filled rectilinearly. But to reduce motion artefacts k-space was retrospectively sorted using the minimal variance algorithm (MVA), based on physiologic data recorded from both the respiratory bellows and electrocardiogram (ECG). Resorted and reconstructed FSE images were compared to contrast enhanced lung images, obtained following intravenous injection of Gd-DTPA-BMA. RESULTS: Biphasic variation in FSE lung signal intensity was observed across the cardiac cycle with a maximal signal change following rapid cardiac ejection (between S and T waves), and following rapid isovolumetric relaxation. A difference image between systolic and diastolic states in the cardiac cycle resulted in images with improved lung contrast to noise ratio (CNR). FSE image intensity was uniform over lung parenchyma while Gd-based enhancement of spoiled gradient recalled echo (SPGR) images showed gravitational dependence. CONCLUSIONS: Here we show how 1H-MR images of lung can be obtained during free breathing. The image contrast obtained during this approach is likely the result of flow and oxygen modulation during the cardiac cycle. This free breathing method provides lung images comparable to those obtained using Gd-enhancement. Besides having the advantage of free breathing, this approach doesn't require any Gd-contrast or suffer from methodological problems associated with perfusion (e.g., poor bolus timing). However, as gravitational differences typically observed in lung perfusion are not visible with this method it is not providing exclusive microvascular perfusion information.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.509
Threshold uncertainty score0.179

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicAtomic and Subatomic Physics ResearchFrench-language works237,207