MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006031087 · doi:10.1186/s12880-020-0413-6

Quantitative comparison of two-dimensional and three-dimensional strain measurement using MRI feature tracking in repair Fontan patients and normal child volunteers

2020· article· en· W3006031087 on OpenAlexaff
Liwei Hu, Qian Wang, Gregory P. Barton, Rong Ouyang, Aimin Sun, Chen Guo, Tongtong Han, Yumin Zhong

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Medical Imaging · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsCircle Cardiovascular Imaging
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaSchool of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong UniversityShanghai Jiao Tong University
KeywordsIntraclass correlationFeature trackingMedicineVentricleRepeatabilityStrain (injury)Ejection fractionCardiac magnetic resonanceCardiac function curveMagnetic resonance imagingCoefficient of variationCardiologyNuclear medicineFontan procedureInternal medicineCardiac magnetic resonance imagingHeart failureRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The accuracy of 2D and 3D strain analyses was evaluated by comparing strain and cardiac function parameters in Fontan repair patients and normal child volunteers. METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled 32 patients with Fontan circulation and 32 child volunteers who had undergone clinical cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) assessment of the dominant ventricle with a 1.5-Tesla MRI scanner. Global and regional strain (2D and 3D) of the dominant ventricle in both groups was assessed using CMR feature-tracking. Correlations between cardiac function and strain data were assessed using Pearson's correlation coefficient values. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and coefficient of variation (CoV) were determined to evaluate repeatability and agreement. RESULTS: The 2D GLS showed significant differences between the Fontan repair patients and volunteers (- 16.49 ± 5.00 vs. -19.49 ± 2.03; p = 0.002). The 2D GRS and 2D GCS showed no significant differences between two groups. 2D GRS: 38.96 ± 14.48 vs. 37.46 ± 7.77; 2D GCS: - 17.64 ± 5.00 vs. -16.89 ± 2.96, respectively; p > 0.05). The 3D global radial strain (GRS), global circumferential strain (GCS), and global longitudinal strain (GLS) showed significant differences between the Fontan repair patients and volunteers (3D GRS: 36.35 ± 16.72 vs. 44.96 ± 9.98; 3D GLS: - 8.86 ± 6.84 vs. -13.67 ± 2.44; 3D GCS: - 13.70 ± 7.84 vs. -18.01 ± 1.78; p < 0.05, respectively). The ejection fraction (EF) and 3D GCS were significantly associated (r = - 0.491, p = 0.004). The 3D GCS showed correlations with the indexed end-diastolic volume (EDV) (r = 0.523, p = 0.002) and indexed end-systolic volume (ESV) (r = 0.602, p < 0.001). 3D strain showed good reproducibility, with GCS showing the best inter-observer agreement (ICC = 0.87 and CoV = 5.15), followed by GLS (ICC = 0.84 and CoV = 5.36). CONCLUSIONS: 3D GCS is feasible, highly reproducible, and strongly correlated with conventional cardiac function measures. 3D GCS assessments may be useful for monitoring abnormal myocardial motion in patients with Fontan circulation.

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)0.001
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 score0.431
Threshold uncertainty score0.705

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Medical ImagingSame topicCongenital Heart Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207