Performance of Automated ASPECTS Software and Value as a Computer-Aided Detection Tool.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
American Journal of Neuroradiology Pub Date : 2023-08-01 Epub Date: 2023-07-27 DOI:10.3174/ajnr.A7956
J Lambert, J Demeestere, B Dewachter, L Cockmartin, A Wouters, R Symons, L Boomgaert, L Vandewalle, L Scheldeman, P Demaerel, R Lemmens
{"title":"Performance of Automated ASPECTS Software and Value as a Computer-Aided Detection Tool.","authors":"J Lambert, J Demeestere, B Dewachter, L Cockmartin, A Wouters, R Symons, L Boomgaert, L Vandewalle, L Scheldeman, P Demaerel, R Lemmens","doi":"10.3174/ajnr.A7956","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong>ASPECTS quantifies early ischemic changes in anterior circulation stroke on NCCT but has interrater variability. We examined the agreement of conventional and automated ASPECTS and studied the value of computer-aided detection.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We retrospectively collected imaging data from consecutive patients with acute ischemic stroke with large-vessel occlusion undergoing thrombectomy. Five raters scored conventional ASPECTS on baseline NCCTs, which were also processed by RAPID software. Conventional and automated ASPECTS were compared with a consensus criterion standard. We determined the agreement over the full ASPECTS range as well as dichotomized, reflecting thrombectomy eligibility according to the guidelines (ASPECTS 0-5 versus 6-10). Raters subsequently scored ASPECTS on the same NCCTs with assistance of the automated ASPECTS outputs, and agreement was obtained.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For the total of 175 cases, agreement among raters individually and the criterion standard varied from fair to good (weighted κ = between 0.38 and 0.76) and was moderate (weighted κ = 0.59) for the automated ASPECTS. The agreement of all raters individually versus the criterion standard improved with software assistance, as did the interrater agreement (overall Fleiss κ = 0.15-0.23; <i>P</i> < .001 and .39 to .55; <i>P</i> = .01 for the dichotomized ASPECTS).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Automated ASPECTS had agreement with the criterion standard similar to that of conventional ASPECTS. However, including automated ASPECTS during the evaluation of NCCT in acute stroke improved the agreement with the criterion standard and improved interrater agreement, which could, therefore, result in more uniform scoring in clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":7875,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Neuroradiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10411841/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Neuroradiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A7956","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and purpose: ASPECTS quantifies early ischemic changes in anterior circulation stroke on NCCT but has interrater variability. We examined the agreement of conventional and automated ASPECTS and studied the value of computer-aided detection.

Materials and methods: We retrospectively collected imaging data from consecutive patients with acute ischemic stroke with large-vessel occlusion undergoing thrombectomy. Five raters scored conventional ASPECTS on baseline NCCTs, which were also processed by RAPID software. Conventional and automated ASPECTS were compared with a consensus criterion standard. We determined the agreement over the full ASPECTS range as well as dichotomized, reflecting thrombectomy eligibility according to the guidelines (ASPECTS 0-5 versus 6-10). Raters subsequently scored ASPECTS on the same NCCTs with assistance of the automated ASPECTS outputs, and agreement was obtained.

Results: For the total of 175 cases, agreement among raters individually and the criterion standard varied from fair to good (weighted κ = between 0.38 and 0.76) and was moderate (weighted κ = 0.59) for the automated ASPECTS. The agreement of all raters individually versus the criterion standard improved with software assistance, as did the interrater agreement (overall Fleiss κ = 0.15-0.23; P < .001 and .39 to .55; P = .01 for the dichotomized ASPECTS).

Conclusions: Automated ASPECTS had agreement with the criterion standard similar to that of conventional ASPECTS. However, including automated ASPECTS during the evaluation of NCCT in acute stroke improved the agreement with the criterion standard and improved interrater agreement, which could, therefore, result in more uniform scoring in clinical practice.

自动 ASPECTS 软件的性能和作为计算机辅助检测工具的价值。
背景和目的:ASPECTS 可量化 NCCT 上前循环卒中的早期缺血性改变,但在评定者之间存在差异。我们检查了传统和自动 ASPECTS 的一致性,并研究了计算机辅助检测的价值:我们回顾性地收集了接受血栓切除术的急性缺血性脑卒中大血管闭塞患者的影像学数据。五名评分员对基线 NCCT 上的常规 ASPECTS 进行评分,这些评分也由 RAPID 软件处理。将传统和自动 ASPECTS 与共识标准进行比较。我们确定了在整个 ASPECTS 范围内以及二分法上的一致性,以反映根据指南进行血栓切除术的资格(ASPECTS 0-5 与 6-10)。评分员随后在自动 ASPECTS 输出的辅助下对相同的 NCCT 进行 ASPECTS 评分,并得出一致结果:结果:在总共 175 个病例中,评分者个人与标准的一致性从一般到良好不等(加权 κ = 0.38 到 0.76 之间),自动 ASPECTS 的一致性为中等(加权 κ = 0.59)。在软件辅助下,所有评分者的个人评分与标准评分的一致性都有所改善,评分者之间的一致性也有所改善(总体Fleiss κ = 0.15-0.23; P < .001 和.39-.55;二分法ASPECTS的P = .01):结论:自动 ASPECTS 与标准的一致性与传统 ASPECTS 相似。结论:自动 ASPECTS 与标准 ASPECTS 的一致性类似于传统 ASPECTS。然而,在急性卒中 NCCT 评估中加入自动 ASPECTS 可提高与标准的一致性,并改善评分者之间的一致性,因此可使临床实践中的评分更加统一。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.10
自引率
5.70%
发文量
506
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The mission of AJNR is to further knowledge in all aspects of neuroimaging, head and neck imaging, and spine imaging for neuroradiologists, radiologists, trainees, scientists, and associated professionals through print and/or electronic publication of quality peer-reviewed articles that lead to the highest standards in patient care, research, and education and to promote discussion of these and other issues through its electronic activities.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信