MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Arterial Wall Shear Stress Measurement In Vivo Using Echo Particle Image Velocimetry (Echo PIV)

2011· article· en· W2313134387 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kunihiko Aizawa, Phillip E. Gates, W. David Strain, Oliver E. Gosling, Luciano Mazzaro, Fuxing Zhang, Alex J. Barker, Jonathan Fulford, Angela C. Shore, Nick G. Bellenger, Craig Lanning, Robin Shandas

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCardiac cycleParticle image velocimetryEcho (communications protocol)UltrasoundBiomedical engineeringBlood flowCommon carotid arteryHemodynamicsShear stressIn vivoMedicineCarotid arteriesPhysicsRadiologyTurbulenceCardiologyComputer scienceMechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wall shear stress (WSS) is an important determinant of vascular endothelial function and vascular health. However, the in vivo measurement of WSS is, at present, difficult or impractical to perform. Echo Particle Image Velocimetry (Echo PIV) is a novel ultrasound-based technique capable of measuring detailed blood flow and hemodynamic information with high temporal and excellent spatial resolution. Echo PIV has been validated in vitro but its ability to measure WSS in vivo has not been established. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare WSS obtained by Echo PIV and by phase-contrast MRI in the common carotid artery of human subjects. METHODS: Right common carotid artery blood flow and hemodynamics were determined in 30 healthy volunteers (50.2±12.9 yrs, 17 men) using Echo PIV and MRI on separate occasions. Echo PIV is the method that combines conventional B-mode ultrasound (Sonix RP, Ultrasonix Medical Corporation, Canada), and contrast agent (SonoVue, Bracco Diagnostics, Italy) to generate 2-D velocity vector maps. Data obtained from 7-10 cardiac cycles were ensemble averaged using concurrent ECG, and were processed offline using a custom-designed program. RESULTS: Peak WSS (mean±SD, dyne/cm2) for Echo PIV and for MRI were 13.7±3.4 and 15.3±5.0, respectively. Mean WSS (averaged over the cardiac cycle) was 7.2±1.7 and 8.1±2.8 for Echo PIV and for MRI, respectively. The correlation coefficients between Echo PIV and MRI in peak WSS and mean WSS were 0.71 and 0.76, respectively (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: The association between WSS measured using Echo PIV and MRI was reasonable. Inherent differences between Echo PIV and MRI measurements may account for at least some of the discrepancies between the two methods, e.g. low temporal and spatial resolution of MRI. We conclude that Echo PIV may be a feasible method for the in vivo assessment of WSS in human arteries. Further studies are planned to determine the utility of Echo PIV for measuring WSS in other vascular beds, such as the brachial and femoral arteries. Supported by grants from NSF (CTS-0421461) and NIH (HL 67393 & 072738).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention→French-language works237,207→