ArticleFrontiers in network physiology2024
On preserving anatomical detail in statistical shape analysis for clustering: focus on left atrial appendage morphology.
Article in Frontiers in network physiology, 2024. 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.
- Evaluating the Impact of Annotation Expertise on AI-Based Ultrasound Segmentation: A Case Study on Left Atrial Appendage.Cardiovascular engineering and technology · 2026Article
- A computational pipeline for clustering left atrial appendage morphology via elastic shape analysis.ArXiv · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Statistical shape analysis (SSA) with clustering is often used to objectively define and categorise anatomical shape variations. However, studies until now have often focused on simplified anatomical reconstructions, despite the complexity of studied anatomies. This work aims to provide insights on the anatomical detail preservation required for SSA of highly diverse and complex anatomies, with particular focus on the left atrial appendage (LAA). This anatomical region is clinically relevant as the location of almost all left atrial thrombi forming during atrial fibrillation (AF). Moreover, its highly patient-specific complex architecture makes its clinical classification especially subjective. Methods: Preliminary LAA meshes were automatically detected after robust image selection and wider left atrial segmentation. Following registration, four additional LAA mesh datasets were created as reductions of the preliminary dataset, with surface reconstruction based on reduced sample point densities. Utilising SSA model parameters determined to optimally represent the preliminary dataset, SSA model performance for the four simplified datasets was calculated. A representative simplified dataset was selected, and clustering analysis and performance were evaluated (compared to clinical labels) between the original trabeculated LAA anatomy and the representative simplification. Results: As expected, simplified anatomies have better SSA evaluation scores (compactness, specificity and generalisation), corresponding to simpler LAA shape representation. However, oversimplification of shapes may noticeably affect 3D model output due to differences in geometric correspondence. Furthermore, even minor simplification may affect LAA shape clustering, where the adjusted mutual information (AMI) score of the clustered trabeculated dataset was 0.67, in comparison to 0.12 for the simplified dataset. Discussion: This study suggests that greater anatomical preservation for complex and diverse LAA morphologies, currently neglected, may be more useful for shape categorisation via clustering analyses.
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.