Comparison of algorithms for detection of active inflammatory lesions in sacroiliitis

Igor Gawłowski, Joanna Ożga, Agata Raczko
{"title":"Comparison of algorithms for detection of active inflammatory lesions in sacroiliitis","authors":"Igor Gawłowski, Joanna Ożga, Agata Raczko","doi":"10.15584/ejcem.2024.1.11","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction and aim. Artificial intelligence is increasingly being used in the medicine, particularly in radiological diagnosis of diseases such as an axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). The aim of this study is to compare the available algorithms designed to detect active sacroiliitis in patients with axSpA. Material and methods. Four algorithms, two semi-automated and two full-automated for the assessment of bone marrow ede ma (BME) on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the sacroiliac joints (SIJs) were included in the study. They were described and compared in terms of specificity, sensitivity, and correlation of BME detection findings between AI and experts. Analysis of the literature. Among all automated algorithms, the one created by Bressem et al. had the highest number of ex aminations analyzed in the study, involving 593 MRIs of SIJs. The sensitivity and specificity, as well as the correlation between the AI’s detection of BME versus manual, were not calculated for each algorithm. Rzecki’s algorithm had the greatest sensitivity and specificity for BME detection reaching 0.95 and 0.96, respectively. In addition, its Speraman’s coefficient of correlation be tween manual and automated measurements was 0.866. Conclusion. Each of described algorithms is certainly useful in assessing BME in the MRI examinations of SIJs.","PeriodicalId":11828,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15584/ejcem.2024.1.11","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction and aim. Artificial intelligence is increasingly being used in the medicine, particularly in radiological diagnosis of diseases such as an axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). The aim of this study is to compare the available algorithms designed to detect active sacroiliitis in patients with axSpA. Material and methods. Four algorithms, two semi-automated and two full-automated for the assessment of bone marrow ede ma (BME) on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the sacroiliac joints (SIJs) were included in the study. They were described and compared in terms of specificity, sensitivity, and correlation of BME detection findings between AI and experts. Analysis of the literature. Among all automated algorithms, the one created by Bressem et al. had the highest number of ex aminations analyzed in the study, involving 593 MRIs of SIJs. The sensitivity and specificity, as well as the correlation between the AI’s detection of BME versus manual, were not calculated for each algorithm. Rzecki’s algorithm had the greatest sensitivity and specificity for BME detection reaching 0.95 and 0.96, respectively. In addition, its Speraman’s coefficient of correlation be tween manual and automated measurements was 0.866. Conclusion. Each of described algorithms is certainly useful in assessing BME in the MRI examinations of SIJs.
骶髂关节炎活动性炎症病变检测算法比较
引言和目的。人工智能越来越多地应用于医学领域,尤其是轴性脊柱关节炎(axSpA)等疾病的放射学诊断。本研究旨在比较现有的用于检测轴性脊柱关节炎(axSpA)患者活动性骶髂关节炎的算法。材料和方法。本研究采用了四种算法,其中两种为半自动算法,两种为全自动算法,用于评估骶髂关节(SIJ)磁共振成像(MRI)上的骨髓造影(BME)。研究从特异性、灵敏度以及人工智能和专家之间 BME 检测结果的相关性等方面对这两种方法进行了描述和比较。文献分析。在所有自动算法中,Bressem 等人创建的算法在研究中分析的病例数最多,涉及 593 例 SIJ 的 MRI。没有计算每种算法的灵敏度和特异性,以及人工智能检测 BME 与人工检测之间的相关性。Rzecki 算法检测 BME 的灵敏度和特异性最高,分别达到 0.95 和 0.96。此外,人工测量与自动测量之间的斯佩拉曼相关系数为 0.866。上述每种算法都有助于在 SIJ 的 MRI 检查中评估 BME。
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
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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