MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367693322 · doi:10.1007/s12630-023-02420-7

Ancillary radionuclide perfusion studies in the determination of death by neurologic criteria: methods, interpretation, and lexicon—a user guide for the clinician

2023· review· en· W4367693322 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lionel S. Zuckier, Nicole K. McKinnon

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d anesthésie · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan Donation and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationUniversity of TorontoOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineParenchymaCerebral blood flowPerfusionNuclear medicineBlood flowTechnetiumRadiologyPathologyCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Radionuclide perfusion studies have an established ancillary role in determination of death by neurologic criteria (DNC). While critically important, these examinations are not well understood by individuals outside of the imaging specialties. The purpose of this review is to clarify relevant concepts and nomenclature and provide a lexicon of relevant terminology of value to non-nuclear medicine practitioners who wish to better understand these examinations. Radionuclides were first employed to evaluate cerebral blood flow in 1969. Radionuclide DNC examinations that use lipophobic radiopharmaceuticals (RPs) entail a flow phase followed immediately by blood pool images. On flow imaging, presence of intracranial activity within the arterial vasculature is scrutinized following arrival of the RP bolus into the neck. Lipophilic RPs designed for functional brain imaging were introduced to nuclear medicine in the 1980s and were engineered to cross the blood–brain–barrier and be retained in the parenchyma. The lipophilic RP 99m Tc-hexamethylpropyleneamine oxime ( 99m Tc-HMPAO) was first used as an ancillary investigation in DNC in 1986. Examinations using lipophilic RPs entail both flow and parenchymal phase images. According to some guidelines, parenchymal phase uptake should be assessed by tomographic imaging, while other investigators consider simple planar imaging sufficient. Findings of perfusion on either the flow or parenchymal phase of the examination effectively precludes DNC. If the flow phase is omitted or somehow compromised, the parenchymal phase remains sufficient for DNC. A priori , parenchymal phase imaging is superior to flow phase imaging for several reasons and lipophilic RPs are favoured over lipophobic RPs in that both flow and parenchymal phase imaging are performed. Disadvantages of lipophilic RPs are increased cost and the need to procure them from a central laboratory, which can prove difficult, especially outside usual working hours. According to most current guidelines, both lipophilic and lipophobic RP categories are acceptable for use in ancillary investigations in DNC, with a growing overt preference for studies using the lipophilic RPs based on their ability to capture the parenchymal phase. The new adult and pediatric Canadian recommendations favour use of lipophilic RPs to variable degrees, specifically 99m Tc-HMPAO, the lipophilic moiety which has undergone the greatest validation. Although ancillary use of radiopharmaceuticals is quite settled in multiple DNC guidelines and best practices, several areas of further research remain open to investigation. Examens auxiliaires de perfusion nucléaire pour la détermination du décès selon des critères neurologiques : méthodes, interprétation et lexique—un guide de l’utilisateur à l’intention du clinicien

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0110.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.029

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations16
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d anesthésieSame topicOrgan Donation and TransplantationFrench-language works237,207