An Evaluation of Low-Cost Vision Processors for Efficient Star Identification.

Star trackers are navigation sensors that are used for attitude determination of a satellite relative to certain stars. A star tracker is required to be accurate and also consume as little power as possible in order to be used in small satellites. While traditional approaches use lookup tables for identifying stars, the latest advances in star tracking use neural networks for automatic star identification. This manuscript evaluates two low-cost processors capable of running a star identification neural network, the Intel Movidius Myriad 2 Vision Processing Unit (VPU) and the STM32 Microcontroller. The intention of this manuscript is to compare the accuracy and power usage to evaluate the suitability of each device for use in a star tracker. The Myriad 2 VPU and the STM32 Microcontroller have been specifically chosen because of their performance on computer vision algorithms alongside being cost-effective and low power consuming devices. The experimental results showed that the Myriad 2 proved to be efficient and consumed around 1 Watt of power while maintaining 99.08% accuracy with an input including false stars. Comparatively the STM32 was able to deliver comparable accuracy (99.07%) and power measurement results. The proposed experimental setup is beneficial for small spacecraft missions that require low-cost and low power consuming star trackers.

Comparison of NICE and ESC proposed strategies on new onset chest pain and the contemporary clinical utility of pretest probability risk score.

AIMS: Patients with de novo chest pain are usually investigated non-invasively. The new UK-National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines recommend CT coronary angiography (CTCA) for all patients, while European Society of Cardiology (ESC) recommends functional tests. We sought to compare the clinical utility and perform a cost analysis of these recommendations in two UK centres with different primary investigative strategies. METHODSRESULTS: We compared two groups of patients, group A (n=667) and group B (n=654), with new onset chest pain in two neighbouring National Health Service hospitals, each primarily following either ESC (group A) or NICE (group B) guidance. We assessed the clinical utility of each strategy, including progression to invasive coronary angiography (ICA) and revascularisation. We present a retrospective cost analysis in the context of UK tariff for stress echo (£176), CTCA (£220) and ICA (£1001). Finally, we sought to identify predictors of revascularisation in the whole population.Baseline characteristics in both groups were similar. The progression to ICA was comparable (9.9% vs 12.0%, p=0.377), with similar requirement for revascularisation (4.0% vs 5.0%.; p=0.532). The average cost of investigations per investigated patient was lower in group A (£279.66 vs £325.77), saving £46.11 per patient. The ESC recommended risk score (RS) was found to be the only predictor of revascularisation (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.06; p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Both NICE and ESC-proposed strategies led to similar rates of ICA and need for revascularisation in discrete, but similar groups of patients. The SE-first approach had a lower overall cost by £46.11 per patient, and the ESC RS was the only variable correlated to revascularisation.

The safety, efficacy and cost-effectiveness of stress echocardiography in patients with high pretest probability of coronary artery disease.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness of stress echocardiography (SE), as well as the place of SE in patients with high pretest probability (PTP) of coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS: We investigated 257 patients with no history of CAD, who underwent SE, and they had a PTP risk score >61% (high PTP). According to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance (NICE CG95, 2010), these patients should be investigated directly with an invasive coronary angiogram (ICA). We investigated those patients with SE initially and then with ICA when appropriate. Follow-up data with regard to Major Adverse Cardiac and Cerebrovascular Events (MACCE, defined as cardiovascular mortality, cerebrovascular accident (CVA), myocardial infarction (MI) and late revascularisation for acute coronary syndrome/unstable angina) were recorded for a period of 12 months following the SE. The tariff for SE and ICA is £300 and £1400, respectively. RESULTS: 106 patients had a positive SE (41.2%) and 61 of them (57.5%) had further investigation with ICA. 15 (24.6%) of these patients were revascularised. The average cost per patient for investigations was £654.09. If NICE guidance had been followed, the cost would have been significantly higher at £1400 (p<0.001). Overall, 5 MACCE (2.0%) were recorded; 4 (3.8%) in the group of positive SE (2 CVAs and 2 MIs) and 1 (0.7%) in the group of negative SE (1 CVA). There was no MI and no need for revascularisation in the negative SE group. CONCLUSION: Our approach to investigate patients who present with de novo chest pain and high PTP, with SE initially and subsequently with ICA when appropriate, reduces the cost significantly (£745.91 per patient) with a very low rate of MACCE. However, this study is underpowered to assess safety of SE.

Comparison of ESC and NICE guidelines for patients with suspected coronary artery disease: evaluation of the pre-test probability risk scores in clinical practice.

The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) have recently published guidelines for investigating patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). Both provide a risk score (RS) to assess the pre-test probability for CAD to guide clinicians to undertake the most effective investigation. The aim of the study was to establish whether there is a difference between the two RS models. We retrospectively reviewed records of 479 patients who presented to a UK district general hospital with chest pain between August 2011 and April 2013. The RS was calculated using ESC and NICE guidelines and compared. From the 479 patients, 277 (58%) were male and the mean age was 60 years. The mean RS was greater using NICE guidelines compared with ESC (66.3 vs 47.9%, 18.4% difference; p<0.0001). The difference in mean RS was smaller in patients with typical chest pain (13.0%). When we divided the cohort based on NICE criteria into 'high'- and 'low'-risk groups, the difference in the mean RS was 24.3% in the 'high'-risk group (p<0.001) compared with 2.8% in the 'low'-risk group. The UK NICE risk score model overestimates risk compared with the ESC model.