MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3214271422 · doi:10.1002/ccd.30001

First <scp>in‐human</scp> evaluation of a novel intravascular ultrasound and optical coherence tomography system for intracoronary imaging

2021· article· en· W3214271422 on OpenAlexaff
Elie Akl, Natalia Pinilla‐Echeverri, Héctor M. García‐García, Shamir R. Mehta, Kazuhiro Dan, Kayode O. Kuku, Brian K. Courtney, Tej Sheth

Bibliographic record

VenueCatheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoronary Interventions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science CentreMcMaster UniversityPopulation Health Research InstituteMedical Council of CanadaMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntravascular ultrasoundMedicineOptical coherence tomographyConventional PCIPercutaneous coronary interventionRadiologyStentCoronary artery diseaseNuclear medicineCardiologyMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: We evaluated the first in-human performance of a novel hybrid imaging catheter that permits simultaneous and co-registered acquisition of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) images. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 17 patients undergoing planned percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were imaged between August 2018 and August 2019. Eleven patients with both pre- and post-PCI IVUS and OCT images were included in the offline image analysis. IVUS and OCT images were analyzed separately then together with co-registered images for pre-stent findings, and only separately for post-stent findings. A total of 926 frames were analyzed (218 pre-PCI, 708 post-PCI). There was substantial agreement to detect calcific plaque between co-registered IVUS-OCT and standalone IVUS (Kappa 0.72 [0.65-0.79]) and standalone OCT (Kappa 0.75 [0.68-0.81]) while standalone imaging modalities showed lower agreement to detect lipidic and fibrotic plaques compared with co-registered IVUS-OCT. There were more frames with stent underexpansion on IVUS than OCT [72 (28.7%) vs. 58 (23.1%), respectively, p = 0.039]. Detection rates of incomplete stent apposition (present on 20 OCT frames vs. 2 IVUS frames, p < 0.001) and tissue protrusion (40 vs. 27 frames, p < 0.001) were higher on OCT than IVUS. One stent edge dissection was detected in the image analysis and was seen on OCT but not IVUS. All 177 frames with image artifacts contained at least one co-registered imaging modality with interpretable diagnostic content. There were no study device-related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Hybrid image acquisition was safe. The availability of both IVUS and OCT changed image interpretation compared to either modality alone, suggesting a complementary role of these two techniques.

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)0.001
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 score0.494
Threshold uncertainty score0.662

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCatheterization and Cardiovascular InterventionsSame topicCoronary Interventions and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207