MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224219957 · doi:10.3390/tomography8020092

Effect of Cardiac Phase on Cardiac Output Index Derived from Dynamic CT Myocardial Perfusion Imaging

2022· article· en· W4224219957 on OpenAlexaff
Sergio Dempsey, Ting‐Yim Lee, Abbas Samani, Aaron So

Bibliographic record

VenueTomography · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced X-ray and CT Imaging
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical TrialsLawson Health Research InstituteWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHounsfield scalePerfusionMedicineCardiac function curveCardiac outputNuclear medicineMyocardial perfusion imagingPerfusion scanningCardiologyInternal medicineRadiologyHemodynamicsComputed tomographyHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: The aortic time-enhancement curve obtained from dynamic CT myocardial perfusion imaging can be used to derive the cardiac output (CO) index based on the indicator dilution principle. The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of cardiac phase at which CT myocardial perfusion imaging is triggered on the CO index measurement with this approach. Methods: Electrocardiogram (ECG) gated myocardial perfusion imaging was performed on farm pigs with consecutive cardiac axial scans using a large-coverage CT scanner (Revolution, GE Healthcare) after intravenous contrast administration. Multiple sets of dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) cardiac images were reconstructed retrospectively from 30% to 80% R-R intervals with a 5% phase increment. The time-enhancement curve sampled from above the aortic orifice in each DCE image set was fitted with a modified gamma variate function (MGVF). The fitted curve was then normalized to the baseline data point unaffected by the streak artifact emanating from the contrast solution in the right heart chamber. The Stewart−Hamilton equation was used to calculate the CO index based on the integral of the fitted normalized aortic curve, and the results were compared among different cardiac phases. Results: The aortic time-enhancement curves sampled at different cardiac phases were different from each other, especially in the baseline portion of the curve where the effect of streak artifact was prominent. After properly normalizing and denoising with a MGVF, the integrals of the aortic curve were minimally different among cardiac phases (0.228 ± 0.001 Hounsfield Unit × second). The corresponding mean CO index was 4.031 ± 0.028 L/min. There were no statistical differences in either the integral of the aortic curve or CO index among different cardiac phases (p > 0.05 for all phases).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTomographySame topicAdvanced X-ray and CT ImagingFrench-language works237,207