Multi-View 3D Transesophageal Echocardiography Registration and Volume Compounding for Mitral Valve Procedure Planning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three-dimensional ultrasound mosaicing can increase image quality and expand the field of view. However, limited work has been done applying these compounded approaches for cardiac procedures focused on the mitral valve. For procedures targeting the mitral valve, transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is the primary imaging modality used as it provides clear 3D images of the valve and surrounding tissues. However, TEE suffers from image artefacts and signal dropout, particularly for structures lying below the valve, including chordae tendineae, making it necessary to acquire alternative echo views to visualize these structures. Due to the limited field of view obtainable, the entire ventricle cannot be directly visualized in sufficient detail from a single image acquisition in 3D. We propose applying an image compounding technique to TEE volumes acquired from a mid-esophageal position and several transgastric positions in order to reconstruct a high-detail volume of the mitral valve and sub-valvular structures. This compounding technique utilizes both fully and semi-simultaneous group-wise registration to align the multiple 3D volumes, followed by a weighted intensity compounding step based on the monogenic signal. This compounding technique is validated using images acquired from two excised porcine mitral valve units and three patient data sets. We demonstrate that this compounding technique accurately captures the physical structures present, including the mitral valve, chordae tendineae and papillary muscles. The chordae length measurement error between the compounded ultrasound and ground-truth CT for two porcine valves is reported as 0.7 ± 0.6 mm and 0.6 ± 0.6 mm.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".