Intravascular Ultrasound Can Be Used to Locate Nerves, but not Confirm Ablation, During Renal Sympathetic Denervation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: No methods exist for confirming nerve ablation in catheter-based renal sympathetic denervation (RDN). METHODS: We investigated the feasibility of using intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) to locate nerves and observe nerve integrity changes during RDN in a pig. To confirm our observations, we used post-RDN histological sections matched anatomically to the IVUS images. RESULTS: IVUS revealed multiple hypoechoic structures along the renal artery, whose locations matched those of nerves in the histological sections. Nerves clustered near the junction between the renal artery and vein. Histology confirmed necrosis of nerve bundles at RDN ablation sites, but no changes in echogenicity were observed using IVUS. CONCLUSIONS: Although IVUS cannot currently be used to confirm ablation during RDN, it clearly reveals some clusters of renal sympathetic nerves. It remains to be demonstrated how IVUS can guide RDN devices and potentially improve ablation success.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".