MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389728962 · doi:10.3174/ajnr.a8073

Delayed Gadolinium Leakage in Ocular Structures on Brain MR Imaging: Prevalence and Associated Factors

2023· article· en· W4389728962 on OpenAlexaff
Richard Olatunji, Timothy Lim, B Jones, Mónica Tafur, Shobhit Mathur, Amy Lin, Aditya Bharatha, Suradech Suthiphosuwan

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Neuroradiology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicLanthanide and Transition Metal Complexes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGadoliniumFluid-attenuated inversion recoveryNuclear medicineCreatinineMagnetic resonance imagingPopulationLogistic regressionRetrospective cohort studyInternal medicineSurgeryRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:</h3> Gadolinium leakage in ocular structures (GLOS) is characterized by hyperintense signal in the chambers of the eye on FLAIR and has been reported in association with blood-ocular barrier breakdown in patients with ischemic strokes. The underlying mechanism of GLOS remains poorly understood; however, some studies suggest it may be part of a physiologic excretion pathway of gadolinium. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of GLOS in an unselected patient population. <h3>MATERIALS AND METHODS:</h3> A retrospective analysis was conducted on 439 patients who underwent brain MR imaging within 7 days of receiving a gadolinium-based contrast agent injection for a prior MR imaging study. Clinical, imaging, and laboratory data were collected. Descriptive and logistic regression analyses were performed. <h3>RESULTS:</h3> GLOS was observed in 26 of 439 patients (6%). The occurrence of GLOS varied with time, with 3 (12%), 14 (54%), 8 (31%), and 1 (4%) patient showing GLOS within 24, 25–72, 73–120, and &gt;120 hours after gadolinium-based contrast agent injection, respectively. Patients with GLOS were older (median age: 72 versus 55 years, <i>P</i> = .001) and had higher median serum creatinine levels (73 versus 64 µmol/L, <i>P</i> = .005) and a lower median estimated glomerular filtration rate (84 versus 101 mL/min/1.73 m<sup>2</sup>, <i>P</i> &lt; .001). A shorter median time interval between gadolinium-based contrast agent injection and the index brain MR imaging was observed in the group positive for GLOS (62 versus 91 hours, <i>P</i> = .003). Multivariable regression analysis identified the estimated glomerular filtration rate (OR = 0.970; 95% CI, 0.049–0.992; <i>P</i> = .008) and time interval since gadolinium-based contrast agent injection (OR = 0.987; 95% CI, 0.977–0.997; <i>P</i> = .012) as independent factors associated with GLOS. <h3>CONCLUSIONS:</h3> GLOS was observed in only a small percentage of patients receiving gadolinium-based contrast agent within 7 days before brain MR imaging. This phenomenon was noted in patients with normal findings on brain MR imaging and those with various CNS pathologies, and it was associated with lower estimated glomerular filtration rates and shorter time intervals after gadolinium-based contrast agent injection. While GLOS may be a physiologic gadolinium-based contrast agent excretion pathway, the presence of ocular disease was not formally evaluated in the included population. Awareness of GLOS is nonetheless useful for appropriate radiologic interpretation.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.867
Threshold uncertainty score0.412

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designObservational
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 venueAmerican Journal of NeuroradiologySame topicLanthanide and Transition Metal ComplexesFrench-language works237,207