Artificial Intelligence Algorithm Improves Radiologist Performance in Skeletal Age Assessment: A Prospective Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background Previous studies suggest that use of artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms as diagnostic aids may improve the quality of skeletal age assessment, though these studies lack evidence from clinical practice. Purpose To compare the accuracy and interpretation time of skeletal age assessment on hand radiograph examinations with and without the use of an AI algorithm as a diagnostic aid. Materials and Methods In this prospective randomized controlled trial, the accuracy of skeletal age assessment on hand radiograph examinations was performed with (n = 792) and without (n = 739) the AI algorithm as a diagnostic aid. For examinations with the AI algorithm, the radiologist was shown the AI interpretation as part of their routine clinical work and was permitted to accept or modify it. Hand radiographs were interpreted by 93 radiologists from six centers. The primary efficacy outcome was the mean absolute difference between the skeletal age dictated into the radiologists' signed report and the average interpretation of a panel of four radiologists not using a diagnostic aid. The secondary outcome was the interpretation time. A linear mixed-effects regression model with random center- and radiologist-level effects was used to compare the two experimental groups. Results Overall mean absolute difference was lower when radiologists used the AI algorithm compared with when they did not (5.36 months vs 5.95 months; P = .04). The proportions at which the absolute difference exceeded 12 months (9.3% vs 13.0%, P = .02) and 24 months (0.5% vs 1.8%, P = .02) were lower with the AI algorithm than without it. Median radiologist interpretation time was lower with the AI algorithm than without it (102 seconds vs 142 seconds, P = .001). Conclusion Use of an artificial intelligence algorithm improved skeletal age assessment accuracy and reduced interpretation times for radiologists, although differences were observed between centers. Clinical trial registration no. NCT03530098 © RSNA, 2021 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Rubin in this issue.

Deep learning to automate Brasfield chest radiographic scoring for cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the hypothesis that a deep convolutional neural network (DCNN) model could facilitate automated Brasfield scoring of chest radiographs (CXRs) for patients with cystic fibrosis (CF), performing similarly to a pediatric radiologist. METHODS: All frontal/lateral chest radiographs (2058 exams) performed in CF patients at a single institution from January 2008-2018 were retrospectively identified, and ground-truth Brasfield scoring performed by a board-certified pediatric radiologist. 1858 exams (90.3%) were used to train and validate the DCNN model, while 200 exams (9.7%) were reserved for a test set. Five board-certified pediatric radiologists independently scored the test set according to the Brasfield method. DCNN model vs. radiologist performance was compared using Spearman correlation (ρ) as well as mean difference (MD), mean absolute difference (MAD), and root mean squared error (RMSE) estimation. RESULTS: For the total Brasfield score, ρ for the model-derived results computed pairwise with each radiologist's scores ranged from 0.79-0.83, compared to 0.85-0.90 for radiologist vs. radiologist scores. The MD between model estimates of the total Brasfield score and the average score of radiologists was -0.09. Based on MD, MAD, and RMSE, the model matched or exceeded radiologist performance for all subfeatures except air-trapping and large lesions. CONCLUSIONS: A DCNN model is promising for predicting CF Brasfield scores with accuracy similar to that of a pediatric radiologist.