MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Fresh Cadavers: Initial Experiences

2017· article· en· W4389028647 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Craig Harness, Mark E. Lindsay, Don Brien, Patrick W. Stroman, Joseph S. Gati, Leslie W. MacKenzie, Blaine A. Chronik

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAbdominal Trauma and Injuries
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPerfusionCadaverMagnetic resonance imagingDissection (medical)MedicineNuclear medicineBiomedical engineeringAnatomyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction We seek the capacity to relate structural data obtained from Magnetic Resonance Imaging of intact specimens to the information gained from subsequent dissection. The first step in this process is evaluation and optimization of MRI protocols for studying fresh cadavers, and our first experiences with this process are presented here. Methods This work was conducted per the Queen's University HSREB study DBMS‐051‐15. Four specimens were obtained over a period of approximately 7 months for use in this study, and three (identified as specimens 1–3) of these were selected for study in the MRI. Specimens were collected from the morgue as soon as possible in all cases. Each specimen was first perfused with 10L of a 1% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) and 72mM NaCl pH7 perfusion buffer; exsanguination was simultaneously performed. The purpose of the EDTA was to attempt to ensure blood and any residual clotting was removed. A second perfusion was 5L of MnCl (0.5g/L), which was used to attempt to ensure low MRI signal in the vascular space and thereby enhance tissue contrast and identification. The venesections used for exsanguination were clamped with hemostats both proximally and distally to the section prior to the MnCl perfusion. Both solutions were injected via the brachial artery with an average pressure of 10–18psi. Each specimen was imaged using a Siemens Tim Trio (3 T) MRI system. No specific attempt was made to maintain consistency of the applied imaging protocol across the samples, as the purpose of the study was in part to evaluate and optimize a protocol suitable for cadaver imaging; however, in all three cases the following pulse sequences were used: Flash‐3D VIBE‐DIXON, T2w SPACE, DESS, and DTI. The typical total imaging session duration for each specimen was between 2 and 3 hours. Results shows example MR data from three different sequences acquired from Specimen 3 (which was considered to be the most successful). This indicates the different image data that can be acquired from a single specimen. shows representative images from one sequence (VIBE‐DIXON, “water” image) from each of the three specimens, thereby providing an indication of the variation between specimens. Discussion Each of the MR sequences used provides different information on the specimen; however, for structural assessment it appears that the VIBE‐DIXON sequence, which provides separate images of “water” and “fat”, is particularly useful in this application. Both T2w SPACE and DESS performed well. Further sequence optimization is underway for this application. Not surprisingly, it was apparent that the best quality results were obtained by attempting to keep the post‐mortem hours prior to analysis at a minimum. In the case Specimen 2 (40 hours post‐mortem) it was noticeably more difficult to optimize the exsanguination and subsequent perfusion. Specimen 3 was the most successful, in approximately equal parts due to the better condition of the specimen itself, shorter time post‐mortem, and improved procedures due to experience gained. Support or Funding Information Funding from Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and the Ontario Research Fund.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.435
Threshold uncertainty score0.664

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicAbdominal Trauma and InjuriesFrench-language works237,207