RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate a fully automatic deep learning-based method (augmented radiology for vascular aneurysm [ARVA]) for aortic segmentation and simultaneous diameter and volume measurements. METHODS: A clinical validation dataset was constructed from preoperative and postoperative aortic computed tomography angiography (CTA) scans for assessing these functions. The dataset totaled 350 computed tomography angiography scans from 216 patients treated at two different hospitals. ARVA's ability to segment the aorta into seven morphologically based aortic segments and measure maximum outer-to-outer wall transverse diameters and compute volumes for each was compared with the measurements of six experts (ground truth) and thirteen clinicians. RESULTS: Ground truth (experts') measurements of diameters and volumes were manually performed for all aortic segments. The median absolute diameter difference between ground truth and ARVA was 1.6 mm (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.5-1.7; and 1.6 mm [95% CI, 1.6-1.7]) between ground truth and clinicians. ARVA produced measurements within the clinical acceptable range with a proportion of 85.5% (95% CI, 83.5-86.3) compared with the clinicians' 86.0% (95% CI, 83.9-86.0). The median volume similarity error ranged from 0.93 to 0.95 in the main trunk and achieved 0.88 in the iliac arteries. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the reliability of a fully automated artificial intelligence-driven solution capable of quick aortic segmentation and analysis of both diameter and volume for each segment.
Asunto(s)
Aortografía , Angiografía por Tomografía Computarizada , Aprendizaje Profundo , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Interpretación de Imagen Radiográfica Asistida por Computador , Humanos , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Femenino , Masculino , Anciano , Persona de Mediana Edad , Automatización , Estudios Retrospectivos , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Conjuntos de Datos como Asunto , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/diagnóstico por imagen , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/cirugíaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To develop a deep-learning algorithm for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear detection and to compare its accuracy using two external datasets. METHODS: A database of 19,765 knee MRI scans (17,738 patients) issued from different manufacturers and magnetic fields was used to build a deep learning-based ACL tear detector. Fifteen percent showed partial or complete ACL rupture. Coronal and sagittal fat-suppressed proton density or T2-weighted sequences were used. A Natural Language Processing algorithm was used to automatically label reports associated with each MRI exam. We compared the accuracy of our model on two publicly available external datasets: MRNet, Bien et al, USA (PLoS Med 15:e1002699, 2018); and KneeMRI, Stajduhar et al, Croatia (Comput Methods Prog Biomed 140:151-164, 2017). Receptor operating characteristics (ROC) curves, area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were used to evaluate our model. RESULTS: Our neural networks achieved an AUC value of 0.939 for detection of ACL tears, with a sensitivity of 87% (0.875) and a specificity of 91% (0.908). After retraining our model on Bien dataset and Stajduhar dataset, our algorithm achieved AUC of 0.962 (95% CI 0.930-0.988) and 0.922 (95% CI 0.875, 0.962) respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were respectively 85% (95% CI 75-94%, 0.852), 89% (95% CI 82-97%, 0.894), 0.875 (95% CI 0.817-0.933) for Bien dataset, and 68% (95% CI 54-81%, 0.681), 93% (95% CI 89-97%, 0.934), and 0.870 (95% CI 0.821-0.913) for Stajduhar dataset. CONCLUSION: Our algorithm showed high performance in the detection of ACL tears with AUC on two external datasets, demonstrating its generalizability on different manufacturers and populations. This study shows the performance of an algorithm for detecting anterior cruciate ligament tears with an external validation on populations from countries and continents different from the study population. KEY POINTS: ⢠An algorithm for detecting anterior cruciate ligament ruptures was built from a large dataset of nearly 20,000 MRI with AUC values of 0.939, sensitivity of 87%, and specificity of 91%. ⢠This algorithm was tested on two external populations from different other countries: a dataset from an American population and a dataset from a Croatian population. Performance remains high on these two external validation populations (AUC of 0.962 and 0.922 respectively).
Asunto(s)
Lesiones del Ligamento Cruzado Anterior , Aprendizaje Profundo , Humanos , Ligamento Cruzado Anterior , Lesiones del Ligamento Cruzado Anterior/diagnóstico por imagen , Artroscopía , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética/métodos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Sensibilidad y EspecificidadAsunto(s)
Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal , Aneurisma de la Aorta , Aneurisma de la Aorta/diagnóstico por imagen , Aneurisma de la Aorta/cirugía , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/diagnóstico por imagen , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Inteligencia Artificial , Automatización , Humanos , Interpretación de Imagen Radiográfica Asistida por ComputadorRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate an automatic, deep learning based method (Augmented Radiology for Vascular Aneurysm [ARVA]), to detect and assess maximum aortic diameter, providing cross sectional outer to outer aortic wall measurements. METHODS: Accurate external aortic wall diameter measurement is performed along the entire aorta, from the ascending aorta to the iliac bifurcations, on both pre- and post-operative contrast enhanced computed tomography angiography (CTA) scans. A training database of 489 CTAs was used to train a pipeline of neural networks for automatic external aortic wall measurements. Another database of 62 CTAs, including controls, aneurysmal aortas, and aortic dissections scanned before and/or after endovascular or open repair, was used for validation. The measurements of maximum external aortic wall diameter made by ARVA were compared with those of seven clinicians on this validation dataset. RESULTS: The median absolute difference with respect to expert's measurements ranged from 1 mm to 2 mm among all annotators, while ARVA reported a median absolute difference of 1.2 mm. CONCLUSION: The performance of the automatic maximum aortic diameter method falls within the interannotator variability, making it a potentially reliable solution for assisting clinical practice.