MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323295032 · doi:10.1177/15910199231158444

Development of an in-vitro model based on patient vessel geometry for simulated use testing in neurointerventional surgery

2023· article· en· W4323295032 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Epshtein, Mohammed Salman Shazeeb, Anna Luisa Kühn, Vania Anagnostakou, Christopher M. Raskett, R King, Mayank Goyal, Vítor Mendes Pereira, Adam S Arthur, Ajit S Puri, David Fiorella, Matthew J. Gounis

Bibliographic record

VenueInterventional Neuroradiology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnatomy and Medical Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoFoothills Medical CentreSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
FundersMassachusetts Life Sciences CenterStryker
KeywordsMedicineSurgeryMedical physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BackgroundNeurointerventionalists use in-vitro vascular models to train for worst-case scenarios and test new devices in a simulated use environment to predict clinical performance. According to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), any neurovascular navigation device should be able to successfully navigate two 360-degree turns and two 180-degree turns at the distal portion of the anatomical model. Here, we present a device benchmarking vascular model that complies with FDA recommendations.MethodsOur vascular model was assembled from quantitative characterization of 49 patients who underwent CT angiography either for acute ischemic stroke caused by large vessel occlusion or for aneurysm treatment. Following complete characterization of these data, the vascular segments were 3D reconstructed from CT angiograms of 6 selected patients that presented with challenging anatomy. The curvature and total rotational angle were calculated for each segment and the anatomical parts that complied with FDA recommendations were fused together into a single in-vitro model.ResultsThe model was constructed containing two common carotid branches arising from a type two aortic arch and the dimensions of the overall model exceeded the recommendations of the FDA. Two experienced neurointerventionalists tested the model for navigation difficulty using several devices on an in-vitro perfusion system and concluded that the model provided a realistic, challenging scenario.ConclusionsThis model provides a first prototype designed according to FDA recommendations of cumulative angle while also integrating an aggregation of actual patient-specific anatomy. The availability of this clinically relevant benchmark model presents a potential standardized approach for neurovascular device testing.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.625

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInterventional NeuroradiologySame topicAnatomy and Medical TechnologyFrench-language works237,207