MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309667655 · doi:10.1177/19714009221140536

Susceptibility weighted imaging for qualitative grading of persistent arteriovenous shunting in deep-seated arteriovenous malformations after stereotactic radiation surgery

2022· article· en· W4309667655 on OpenAlexaff
Charlie Hsu, И. В. Фомин, B. Wray, Adam Brideaux, Duncan Lyons, Mahendrah Jaya Kumar, Trevor Watkins, E. Mark Haacke, Timo Krings

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Neuroradiology Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVascular Malformations Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsToronto Western Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSusceptibility weighted imagingRadiosurgeryArteriovenous malformationShuntingNuclear medicineRadiologyVeinMagnetic resonance imagingSurgeryRadiation therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and purpose To investigate Susceptibility Weighted Imaging (SWI) signal changes in the draining vein of deep-seated arterio-venous malformations (AVMs) following stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). Methods and Materials This is a retrospective study of 32 patients with deep-seated AVMs who were treated with SRS. Pre-SRS treatment and post-SRS treatment MRI were performed at 6, 12, and 24-month intervals. Deep-seated AVMs were classified based on their anatomical location and venous drainage pattern. AVM nidal volume (cm 3 ) was estimated using the ABC/2 method. AV shunting of the AVM draining veins were graded according to its SWI signal intensity: hyperintense (grade III), mixed signal intensity (grade II), hypointense (grade I) and absent (grade 0). Conventional time-of-flight (TOF)-MRA and contrast enhanced (CE)-MRA sequences were performed to document the patency of the vein. Results Pre-SRS treatment AVM draining veins were either grade III 18/32 (56%) or grade II 14/32 (44%). Using mixed effects analysis, we demonstrate that each month following the SRS treatment nidal volumes decreased at the rate of 0.51 cm 3 /per month (CI −0.61 to (−0.40)) p =.00. Following the treatment, there was a clinically significant relationship between the signal and nidal volume: signal 0 corresponded with average nidal volume of 1.81 cm 3 (CI 1.40–2.21), signal 1 with nidal volume of 2.06 cm 3 (CI 1.69–2.44), signal 2 with nidal volume 2.73 cm 3 (CI 2.35–3.11) and signal 3 with nidal volume 3.13 cm 3 (CI 2.70–3.56) p = .00. Conclusion Post-SRS AVM draining veins shows a stepwise regression of the SWI signal grades which can be reliably used as a surrogate to monitor the reduction of AV shunting.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.130
Threshold uncertainty score0.484

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Neuroradiology JournalSame topicVascular Malformations Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207