ReviewMethodist DeBakey cardiovascular journal
Intraoperative Imaging and Image Fusion for Venous Interventions.
Review in Methodist DeBakey cardiovascular journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Intraprocedural guidance for recanalization of post-thrombotic venous lesions using live overlay of center lines from pre-operative cross-sectional imaging: a preliminary experience.CVIR endovascular · 2020Article
- The effect of different anaesthesia techniques on postoperative pain and hospital discharge in varicose vein surgery.Cardiovascular journal of AfricaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Advanced imaging for intraoperative evaluation of venous pathologies has played an increasingly significant role in this era of evolving minimally invasive surgical and interventional therapies. The evolution of dedicated venous stents and other novel interventional devices has mandated the need for advanced imaging tools to optimize safe and accurate device deployment. Most venous interventions are typically performed using a combination of standard 2-dimensional (2D) fluoroscopy, digital-subtraction angiography, and intravascular ultrasound imaging techniques. Latest generation computer tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanners have been shown to provide high-resolution 3D and 4D information about venous vasculature. In addition to morphological imaging, novel MRI techniques such as 3D time-resolved MR venography and 4D flow sequences can provide quantitative information and help visualize intricate flow patterns to better understand complex venous pathologies. Moreover, the high-fidelity information from multiple imaging techniques can be integrated using image fusion to overcome the limitations of current intraoperative imaging techniques. For example, the limitations of standard 2D fluoroscopy and luminal angiography can be compensated for by perivascular and soft-tissue information from MRI during complex venous interventions using image fusion techniques. Intraoperative dynamic evaluation of devices such as venous stents and real-time understanding of changes in flow patterns during venous interventions may be routinely available in future interventional suites with integrated multimodality CT or MR imaging capabilities. The purpose of this review is to discuss the outlook for intraoperative imaging and multimodality image fusion techniques and highlight their value during complex venous interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.