Marta Olivé-Gadea, Jordi Mayol, Manuel Requena, Marc Rodrigo-Gisbert, Federica Rizzo, Alvaro Garcia-Tornel, Renato Simonetti, Francesco Diana, Marian Muchada, Jorge Pagola, David Rodriguez-Luna, Noelia Rodriguez-Villatoro, Marta Rubiera, Carlos A Molina, Alejandro Tomasello, David Hernandez, Marta de Dios Lascuevas, Marc Ribo
{"title":"Impact of pre-test probability on AI-LVO detection: a systematic review of LVO prevalence across clinical contexts.","authors":"Marta Olivé-Gadea, Jordi Mayol, Manuel Requena, Marc Rodrigo-Gisbert, Federica Rizzo, Alvaro Garcia-Tornel, Renato Simonetti, Francesco Diana, Marian Muchada, Jorge Pagola, David Rodriguez-Luna, Noelia Rodriguez-Villatoro, Marta Rubiera, Carlos A Molina, Alejandro Tomasello, David Hernandez, Marta de Dios Lascuevas, Marc Ribo","doi":"10.1136/jnis-2025-023775","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Rapid identification of large vessel occlusion (LVO) in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) is essential for reperfusion therapy. Screening tools, including Artificial Intelligence (AI) based algorithms, have been developed to accelerate detection but rely heavily on pre-test LVO prevalence. This study aimed to review LVO prevalence across clinical contexts and analyze its impact on AI-algorithm performance.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We systematically reviewed studies reporting consecutive suspected AIS cohorts. Cohorts were grouped into four clinical scenarios based on patient selection criteria: (a) high suspicion of LVO by stroke specialists (direct-to-angiosuite candidates), (b) high suspicion of LVO according to pre-hospital scales, (c) and (d) any suspected AIS without considering severity cut-off in a hospital or pre-hospital setting, respectively. We analyzed LVO prevalence in each scenario and assessed the false discovery rate (FDR) - number of positive studies needed to encounter a false positive, if applying eight commercially available LVO-detecting algorithms.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 87 cohorts from 80 studies. Median LVO prevalence was: (a) 84% (77-87%), (b) 35% (26-42%), (c) 19% (14-25%), and (d) 14% (8-22%). At high prevalence levels: (a) FDR ranged between 0.007 (1 false positive in 142 positives) and 0.023 (1 in 43), whereas in low prevalence scenarios (Ccand d), FDR ranged between 0.168 (1 in 6) and 0.543 (over 1 in 2).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>To ensure meaningful clinical impact, AI algorithms must be evaluated within the specific populations and care pathways where they are applied.</p>","PeriodicalId":16411,"journal":{"name":"Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/jnis-2025-023775","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NEUROIMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Rapid identification of large vessel occlusion (LVO) in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) is essential for reperfusion therapy. Screening tools, including Artificial Intelligence (AI) based algorithms, have been developed to accelerate detection but rely heavily on pre-test LVO prevalence. This study aimed to review LVO prevalence across clinical contexts and analyze its impact on AI-algorithm performance.
Methods: We systematically reviewed studies reporting consecutive suspected AIS cohorts. Cohorts were grouped into four clinical scenarios based on patient selection criteria: (a) high suspicion of LVO by stroke specialists (direct-to-angiosuite candidates), (b) high suspicion of LVO according to pre-hospital scales, (c) and (d) any suspected AIS without considering severity cut-off in a hospital or pre-hospital setting, respectively. We analyzed LVO prevalence in each scenario and assessed the false discovery rate (FDR) - number of positive studies needed to encounter a false positive, if applying eight commercially available LVO-detecting algorithms.
Results: We included 87 cohorts from 80 studies. Median LVO prevalence was: (a) 84% (77-87%), (b) 35% (26-42%), (c) 19% (14-25%), and (d) 14% (8-22%). At high prevalence levels: (a) FDR ranged between 0.007 (1 false positive in 142 positives) and 0.023 (1 in 43), whereas in low prevalence scenarios (Ccand d), FDR ranged between 0.168 (1 in 6) and 0.543 (over 1 in 2).
Conclusion: To ensure meaningful clinical impact, AI algorithms must be evaluated within the specific populations and care pathways where they are applied.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery (JNIS) is a leading peer review journal for scientific research and literature pertaining to the field of neurointerventional surgery. The journal launch follows growing professional interest in neurointerventional techniques for the treatment of a range of neurological and vascular problems including stroke, aneurysms, brain tumors, and spinal compression.The journal is owned by SNIS and is also the official journal of the Interventional Chapter of the Australian and New Zealand Society of Neuroradiology (ANZSNR), the Canadian Interventional Neuro Group, the Hong Kong Neurological Society (HKNS) and the Neuroradiological Society of Taiwan.