MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400980950 · doi:10.1136/jnis-2024-snis.401

LB-002 Visualization of the human intracranial vasculature and intracranial implants using microangioscopy

2024· article· en· W4400980950 on OpenAlexaffabout
Visish M. Srinivasan, Robert Fahed, C O’Kelly, François Belzile, J Rempel, Vítor Mendes Pereira, Peter Kan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnatomy and Medical Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversité de SherbrookeUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisualizationComputer scienceBiomedical engineeringMedicineArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Although cerebral angiography is the gold standard for the assessment of intracranial vasculature, it suffers from several complications and limitations. Angioscopy is a form of intravascular imaging. Using coherent fiber bundle technology, we developed a MicroAngioscope whose size and flexibility are compatible with the human cerebral vasculature. In this first-in-human (FIH) study, we report our first 8 cases using the MicroAngioscope as an adjunct to conventional angiography in assessing cerebrovascular disease and assisting neurointerventions. Methods A total of 5 physicians working in 4 different centers in Canada obtained a special authorization from the government authority to use the MicroAngioscope in select cases. For each case, we detailed the safety and feasibility of the MicroAngioscope, the optimal imaging technique, and the utility of the device in assessing cerebrovascular disease and neurointerventions as an adjunct to angiography. Results The MicroAngioscope was used in 8 cases. In all cases, the MicroAngioscope was successfully delivered to the location of interest and allowed for a direct live visualization of the cerebrovascular condition and/or the stent that had been deployed. There was no vessel complication of dissection or perforation. The cases included 1 case of stenting of a carotid web, 3 cases of flow diverter treatment of brain aneurysms (one with adjunctive coiling), 2 cases of venous sinus stenting, 1 case of intrasaccular embolization of a venous diverticulum, and 1 case of delayed assessment of a flow diverter for a previously treated pseudoaneurysm. All cases were successfully completed without thromboembolic events or other complications. All patients were neurologically unchanged following their respective procedures. Angioscopy was helpful in making the diagnosis in the case of the carotid web and was helpful in assessing the degree of endothelialization in both arterial and venous stents. Conclusion We recently developed a MicroAngioscope as an intracranial intravascular imaging device. In this FIH study, we demonstrated its early feasibility, safety, and utility in diagnostic and neurointerventional procedures. Disclosures V. Srinivasan: 1; C; Medtronic, Stryker. 2; C; Cerenovus, Stryker, Imperative Care. R. Fahed: None. C. O’Kelly: None. F. Belzile: None. J. Rempel: None. V. Mendes Pereira: None. P. Kan: 1; C; NIH. 2; C; Stryker. 4; C; Vena Medical, None other.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAnatomy and Medical TechnologyFrench-language works237,207