Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39473482›Full record

ArticleAPL bioengineering2024

Toward assessment of rupture risk predictors in abdominal aortic aneurysms including intraluminal thrombus based on 3D+t ultrasound images.

Arjet Nievergeld, Judith Fonken, Esther Maas, Jan-Willem Muller, Mirunalini Thirugnanasambandam, Marc van Sambeek, Richard Lopata

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in APL bioengineering, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Mirunalini ThirugnanasambandamORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4761-884X
Richard LopataPULS/e Group, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6618-6184

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Image-based patient-specific rupture risk analysis for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) has shown considerable promise. However, clinical translation has been hampered by the use of invasive and costly imaging modalities. Despite being a promising alternative, ultrasound (US) makes a full analysis, including intraluminal thrombus (ILT), not trivial. This study explored the feasibility of assessing AAA rupture risk parameters, e.g., peak wall stress (PWS) and peak wall rupture index (PWRI), using US-based models of the AAA wall, finally including ILT. Three-dimensional US data were segmented from a group of AAA patients whose CT data were available within 30 days. The segmented vessel wall and ILT boundaries were converted into a mesh including and excluding ILT to evaluate the effect of adding ILT on the model output. US-based rupture risk parameters (PWS and PWRI) were compared to CT-based results. The US-based PWS and PWRI, including ILT, showed good agreement with CT-based results, and the model excluding ILT showed no significant bias in wall stress or rupture index. When including ILT, a lower US-based wall stress and rupture index of 7.2% and 3.8% were found, respectively. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of PWS was 0.60. The highest ICC was found for the PWRI (ICC = 0.86), indicating good absolute agreement. This study showed that PWRI can be estimated with US when including the ILT, yielding comparable results to CT, and good absolute agreement. Future work should focus on improving the contrast of ILT in US, since this will be essential to performing large-scale studies in AAA cohorts.

Identifiers

PMID39473482
PMCPMC11521438

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.