MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3016363376 · doi:10.1186/s12968-020-00611-5

3D whole-heart isotropic sub-millimeter resolution coronary magnetic resonance angiography with non-rigid motion-compensated PROST

2020· article· en· W3016363376 on OpenAlexaff
Aurélien Bustin, Imran Rashid, Gastão Cruz, Reza Hajhosseiny, Teresa Correia, Radhouène Neji, Ronak Rajani, Tevfik F. Ismail, René M. Botnar, Claudia Prieto

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
FundersCentre For Medical Engineering, King’s College LondonEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchKing's College LondonKing's College Hospital NHS Foundation TrustBritish Heart FoundationWellcome Trust
KeywordsAngiologyMedicineMagnetic resonance imagingCoronary angiographyMillimeterIsotropyCardiac magnetic resonanceMagnetic resonance angiographyRadiologyMotion (physics)Nuclear magnetic resonanceCardiologyOpticsPhysicsMyocardial infarctionClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To enable free-breathing whole-heart sub-millimeter resolution coronary magnetic resonance angiography (CMRA) in a clinically feasible scan time by combining low-rank patch-based undersampled reconstruction (3D-PROST) with a highly accelerated non-rigid motion correction framework. Non-rigid motion corrected CMRA combined with 2D image-based navigators has been previously proposed to enable 100% respiratory scan efficiency in modestly undersampled acquisitions. Achieving sub-millimeter isotropic resolution with such techniques still requires prohibitively long acquisition times. We propose to combine 3D-PROST reconstruction with a highly accelerated non-rigid motion correction framework to achieve sub-millimeter resolution CMRA in less than 10 min. Ten healthy subjects and eight patients with suspected coronary artery disease underwent 4–5-fold accelerated free-breathing whole-heart CMRA with 0.9 mm 3 isotropic resolution. Vessel sharpness, vessel length and image quality obtained with the proposed non-rigid (NR) PROST approach were compared against translational correction only (TC-PROST) and a previously proposed NR motion-compensated technique (non-rigid SENSE) in healthy subjects. For the patient study, image quality scoring and visual comparison with coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) were performed. Average scan times [min:s] were 6:01 ± 0:59 (healthy subjects) and 8:29 ± 1:41 (patients). In healthy subjects, vessel sharpness of the left anterior descending (LAD) and right (RCA) coronary arteries were improved with the proposed non-rigid PROST (LAD: 51.2 ± 8.8%, RCA: 61.2 ± 9.1%) in comparison to TC-PROST (LAD: 43.8 ± 5.1%, P = 0.051, RCA: 54.3 ± 8.3%, P = 0.218) and non-rigid SENSE (LAD: 46.1 ± 5.8%, P = 0.223, RCA: 56.7 ± 9.6%, P = 0.50), although differences were not statistically significant. The average visual image quality score was significantly higher for NR-PROST (LAD: 3.2 ± 0.6, RCA: 3.3 ± 0.7) compared with TC-PROST (LAD: 2.1 ± 0.6, P = 0.018, RCA: 2.0 ± 0.7, P = 0.014) and non-rigid SENSE (LAD: 2.3 ± 0.5, P = 0.008, RCA: 2.5 ± 0.7, P = 0.016). In patients, the proposed approach showed good delineation of the coronaries, in agreement with CCTA, with image quality scores and vessel sharpness similar to that of healthy subjects. We demonstrate the feasibility of combining high undersampling factors with non-rigid motion-compensated reconstruction to obtain high-quality sub-millimeter isotropic CMRA images in ~ 8 min. Validation in a larger cohort of patients with coronary artery disease is now warranted.

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)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.214 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations90
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cardiovascular Magnetic ResonanceSame topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207