MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323807444 · doi:10.1088/2057-1976/acc319

Laser interstitial thermal therapy of lung lesions near large vessels: a numerical study

2023· article· en· W4323807444 on OpenAlexafffund
Andrew Effat, Nicholas Bernards, Alexander Gregor, Edmond W. K. Young, Kazuhiro Yasufuku, Robert Weersink

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomedical Physics & Engineering Express · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreToronto General HospitalUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsLungLaser therapyLaserMedicinePathologyInternal medicinePhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective. Laser interstitial thermal therapy (LITT) is an evolving hyperthermia-based technology that may offer a minimally invasive alternative to inoperable lung cancer. LITT of perivascular targets is challenged by higher risk of disease recurrence due to vascular heat sinks, as well as risk of damage to these vascular structures. The objective of this work is to examine the impact of multiple vessel parameters on the efficacy of the treatment and the integrity of the vessel wall in perivascular LITT. Approach. A finite element model is used to examine the role of vessel proximity, flow rate, and wall thickness on the outcome of the treatment. Main result. The simulated work indicates that vessel proximity is the major factor in driving the magnitude of the heat sink effect. Vessels situated near the target volume may act as a protective measure for reducing healthy tissue damage. Vessels with thicker walls are more at risk of damage during treatment. Interventions to reduce the flow rate may reduce the vessel’s heat sink effect but may also result in increased risk of vascular wall damage. Lastly, even at reduced blood flow rates, the volume of blood reaching the threshold of irreversible damage (>43 °C) is negligible compared to the volume of blood flow throughout the treatment duration. Significance. This investigative simulation yields results that may help guide clinicians on treatment planning near large vessels.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomedical Physics & Engineering ExpressSame topicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic ImagingFrench-language works237,207