CT perfusion in peripheral arterial disease—hemodynamic differences before and after revascularisation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was the assessment of volumetric CT perfusion (CTP) of the lower leg musculature in patients with symptomatic peripheral arterial disease (PAD) before and after interventional revascularisation. METHODS: Twenty-nine consecutive patients with symptomatic PAD of the lower extremities requiring interventional revascularisation were assessed prospectively. All patients underwent a CTP scan of the lower leg, and hemodynamic and angiographic assessment, before and after intervention. Ankle-brachial pressure index (ABI) was determined. CTP parameters were calculated with a perfusion software, acting on a no outflow assumption. A sequential two-compartment model was used. Differences in CTP parameters were assessed with non-parametric tests. RESULTS: . The mean blood volume before/after (BVpre and BVpost, respectively) was 0.71 ± 0.35 and 1.25 ± 1.07 ml/100 ml. BFpost and BVpost were significantly higher than BFpre and BVpre in the treated limb (p = 0.003 and 0.02, respectively), but not in the untreated limb (p = 0.641 and 0.719, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: CTP seems feasible for assessing hemodynamic differences in calf muscles before and after revascularisation in patients with symptomatic PAD. We could show that CTP parameters BF and BV are significantly increased after revascularisation of the symptomatic limb. In the future, this quantitative method might serve as a non-invasive method for surveillance and therapy control of patients with peripheral arterial disease. KEY POINTS: • CTP imaging of the lower limb in patients with symptomatic PAD seems feasible for assessing hemodynamic differences before and after revascularisation in PAD patients. • This quantitative method might serve as a non-invasive method, for surveillance and therapy control of patients with PAD.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".