MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3178756069 · doi:10.1186/s12891-021-04494-0

Can Achilles tendon xanthoma be distinguished from Achilles tendinopathy using Dixon method MRI? A cross-sectional exploratory study

2021· article· en· W3178756069 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas Michael Zahradnik, Mark Cresswell, Kip Squier, Charlotte Waugh, Liam R. Brunham, Hazel R. C. Screen, Alex Scott

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Musculoskeletal Disorders · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTendon Structure and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTendinopathyAchilles tendonMedicineXanthomaTendonMagnetic resonance imagingInternal medicineSurgeryRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Familial hypercholesterolemia is a genetic condition characterized by life-long elevations of plasma low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. In addition to life-threatening cardiovascular complications, intratendinous cholesterol deposits (xanthomas) can lead to pain and tendon thickening, particularly in the Achilles. Clinical detection of xanthomas currently relies upon visual assessment and palpation, or ultrasound-based measures of tendon thickening or echotexture. Misdiagnosis of xanthoma can delay the commencement of potentially life-saving lipid-lowering therapy. Our primary purpose was to determine whether analysis of separated fat and water magnetic resonance images may be able to differentiate between xanthomatic and nonxanthomatic Achilles tendons through quantification of intratendinous fat content. The main hypothesis was that Achilles tendon xanthomas will demonstrate greater lipid content than Achilles tendinopathy or healthy control tendons. METHODS: Bilateral MRI scans of Achilles tendons from 30 participants (n = 10 Achilles tendon xanthoma, n = 10 Achilles overuse tendinopathy, n = 10 healthy controls) were analyzed for total lipid content using the Dixon method of fat and water signal separation. Secondary outcome measures included tendon water content, as well as ultrasound characterization of tendon tissue organization and thickness. RESULTS: Fat content was greater in Achilles tendon xanthomas compared to the tendinopathy (p < 0.0001) and control groups (p < 0.0001). Water content was also greater in Achilles tendon xanthomas compared to the tendinopathy (p < 0.0001) and control groups (p = 0.0002). Ultrasound tissue characterization revealed worse tissue organization in Achilles tendon xanthoma tendons compared to Achilles tendinopathy (p < 0.05) but demonstrated largely overlapping distributions. Achilles tendon xanthoma tendons were, on average, significantly thicker than the tendons of the other two groups (p < 0.01 and p < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: MRI-derived measures of Achilles tendon fat content may be able to distinguish xanthomas from control and tendinopathic tissue. Dixon method MRI warrants further evaluation in an adequately powered study to develop and test clinically relevant diagnostic thresholds.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Musculoskeletal DisordersSame topicTendon Structure and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207