Patient‐specific geometrical distortion corrections of MRI images improve dosimetric planning accuracy of vestibular schwannoma treated with gamma knife stereotactic radiosurgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Purpose To investigate the impact of MRI patient‐specific geometrical distortion (PSD) on the quality of Gamma Knife stereotactic radiosurgery (GK‐SRS) plans of the vestibular schwannoma (VS) tumors. Methods and materials Three open access datasets including the MPI‐Leipzig Mind‐Brain‐Body (318 patients), the slow event‐related fMRI designs dataset (62 patients), and the VS dataset (242 patients) were used. We used first two datasets to train a 3D convolution network to predict the distortion map of third dataset that were then used to calculate and correct the PSD. GK‐SRS plans of VS dataset were used to evaluate dose distribution of PSD‐corrected MRI images. GK‐SRS prescription dose of VS cases was 12 Gy. Geometric and dosimetric discrepancies were assessed between the dose distributions and contours before and after the PSD corrections. Geometry indices were center of the contours, Dice coefficient (DC), Hausdorff distance (HD), and dosimetric indices were , , , and doses, target coverage (TC), Paddick's conformity index (PCI), Paddick's gradient index (GI), and homogeneity index (HI). Results Geometric distortions of about 1.2 mm were observed at the air‐tissue interfaces at the air canal and nasal cavity borders. Average center of the targets was significantly distorted along the frequency encoding direction after the PSD‐correction. Average DC and HD metrics were 0.90 and 2.13 mm. Average , and in Gy significantly increased after PSD correction from 16.85 to 17.25, 12.30 to 12.77, and from 8.98 to 9.92. did not significantly change after the correction. Average TC and PCI significantly increased from 0.97 to 0.98, and 0.94 to 0.96. Average GI decreased significantly from 2.24 to 2.15 after PSD correction. However, HI did not significantly change after the correction. Conclusion The proposed method could predict and correct the PSD that indicates the importance of PSD correction before GK‐SRS plans of the VS patients.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".