Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Purpose: Neurosurgical laser ablation is experiencing a renaissance. Computational tools for ablation planning aim to further improve the intervention. Here, global optimisation and inverse problems are demonstrated to train a model that predicts maximum laser ablation extent.
Methods: A closed-form steady state model is trained on and then subsequently compared to N = 20 retrospective clinical MR thermometry datasets. Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) is calculated to provide a measure of region overlap between the 57 °C isotherms of the thermometry data and the model-predicted ablation regions; 57 °C is a tissue death surrogate at thermal steady state. A global optimisation scheme samples the dominant model parameter sensitivities, blood perfusion (ω) and optical parameter (μ) values, throughout a parameter space totalling 11 440 value-pairs. This represents a lookup table of μ-ω pairs with the corresponding DSC value for each patient dataset. The μ-ω pair with the maximum DSC calibrates the model parameters, maximising predictive value for each patient. Finally, leave-one-out cross-validation with global optimisation information trains the model on the entire clinical dataset, and compares against the model naïvely using literature values for ω and μ.
Results: When using naïve literature values, the model's mean DSC is 0.67 whereas the calibrated model produces 0.82 during cross-validation, an improvement of 0.15 in overlap with the patient data. The 95% confidence interval of the mean difference is 0.083-0.23 (p < 0.001).
Conclusions: During cross-validation, the calibrated model is superior to the naïve model as measured by DSC, with +22% mean prediction accuracy. Calibration empowers a relatively simple model to become more predictive.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6295207 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02656736.2017.1319974 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!