AI demonstrates comparable diagnostic performance to radiologists in MRI detection of anterior cruciate ligament tears: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Saran Singh Gill, Taha Haq, Yi Zhao, Mihailo Ristic, Dimitri Amiras, Chinmay Madhukar Gupte
{"title":"AI demonstrates comparable diagnostic performance to radiologists in MRI detection of anterior cruciate ligament tears: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Saran Singh Gill, Taha Haq, Yi Zhao, Mihailo Ristic, Dimitri Amiras, Chinmay Madhukar Gupte","doi":"10.1007/s00330-025-12020-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries are among the most common knee injuries, affecting 1 in 3500 people annually. With rising rates of ACL tears, particularly in children, timely diagnosis is critical. This study evaluates artificial intelligence (AI) effectiveness in diagnosing and classifying ACL tears on MRI through a systematic review and meta-analysis, comparing AI performance with clinicians and assessing radiomic and non-radiomic models.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Major databases were searched for AI models diagnosing ACL tears via MRIs. 36 studies, representing 52 models, were included. Accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity metrics were extracted. Pooled estimates were calculated using a random-effects model. Subgroup analyses compared MRI sequences, ground truths, AI versus clinician performance, and radiomic versus non-radiomic models. This study was conducted in line with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocols.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>AI demonstrated strong diagnostic performance, with pooled accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of 87.37%, 90.73%, and 91.34%, respectively. Classification models achieved pooled metrics of 90.46%, 88.68%, and 94.08%. Radiomic models outperformed non-radiomic models, and AI demonstrated comparable performance to clinicians in key metrics. Three-dimensional (3D) proton density fat suppression (PDFS) sequences with < 2 mm slice depth yielded the most promising results, despite small sample sizes, favouring arthroscopic benchmarks. Despite high heterogeneity (I² > 90%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>AI models demonstrate diagnostic performance comparable to clinicians and may serve as valuable adjuncts in ACL tear detection, pending prospective validation. However, substantial heterogeneity and limited interpretability remain key challenges. Further research and standardised evaluation frameworks are needed to support clinical integration.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>Question Is AI effective and accurate in diagnosing and classifying anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears on MRI? Findings AI demonstrated high accuracy (87.37%), sensitivity (90.73%), and specificity (91.34%) in ACL tear diagnosis, matching or surpassing clinicians. Radiomic models outperformed non-radiomic approaches. Clinical relevance AI can enhance the accuracy of ACL tear diagnosis, reducing misdiagnoses and supporting clinicians, especially in resource-limited settings. Its integration into clinical workflows may streamline MRI interpretation, reduce diagnostic delays, and improve patient outcomes by optimising management.</p>","PeriodicalId":12076,"journal":{"name":"European Radiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-025-12020-2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries are among the most common knee injuries, affecting 1 in 3500 people annually. With rising rates of ACL tears, particularly in children, timely diagnosis is critical. This study evaluates artificial intelligence (AI) effectiveness in diagnosing and classifying ACL tears on MRI through a systematic review and meta-analysis, comparing AI performance with clinicians and assessing radiomic and non-radiomic models.

Methods: Major databases were searched for AI models diagnosing ACL tears via MRIs. 36 studies, representing 52 models, were included. Accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity metrics were extracted. Pooled estimates were calculated using a random-effects model. Subgroup analyses compared MRI sequences, ground truths, AI versus clinician performance, and radiomic versus non-radiomic models. This study was conducted in line with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocols.

Results: AI demonstrated strong diagnostic performance, with pooled accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of 87.37%, 90.73%, and 91.34%, respectively. Classification models achieved pooled metrics of 90.46%, 88.68%, and 94.08%. Radiomic models outperformed non-radiomic models, and AI demonstrated comparable performance to clinicians in key metrics. Three-dimensional (3D) proton density fat suppression (PDFS) sequences with < 2 mm slice depth yielded the most promising results, despite small sample sizes, favouring arthroscopic benchmarks. Despite high heterogeneity (I² > 90%).

Conclusion: AI models demonstrate diagnostic performance comparable to clinicians and may serve as valuable adjuncts in ACL tear detection, pending prospective validation. However, substantial heterogeneity and limited interpretability remain key challenges. Further research and standardised evaluation frameworks are needed to support clinical integration.

Key points: Question Is AI effective and accurate in diagnosing and classifying anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears on MRI? Findings AI demonstrated high accuracy (87.37%), sensitivity (90.73%), and specificity (91.34%) in ACL tear diagnosis, matching or surpassing clinicians. Radiomic models outperformed non-radiomic approaches. Clinical relevance AI can enhance the accuracy of ACL tear diagnosis, reducing misdiagnoses and supporting clinicians, especially in resource-limited settings. Its integration into clinical workflows may streamline MRI interpretation, reduce diagnostic delays, and improve patient outcomes by optimising management.

人工智能在前交叉韧带撕裂的MRI检测中表现出与放射科医生相当的诊断性能:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析。
前交叉韧带(ACL)损伤是最常见的膝关节损伤之一,每年3500人中就有1人受到影响。随着前交叉韧带撕裂率的上升,特别是在儿童中,及时诊断至关重要。本研究通过系统回顾和荟萃分析来评估人工智能(AI)在MRI诊断和分类ACL撕裂方面的有效性,将AI的表现与临床医生进行比较,并评估放射学和非放射学模型。方法:检索各大数据库中通过mri诊断ACL撕裂的AI模型。共纳入36项研究,52个模型。提取准确性、敏感性和特异性指标。汇总估计使用随机效应模型计算。亚组分析比较了MRI序列、基本事实、人工智能与临床医生的表现,以及放射学与非放射学模型。本研究按照系统评价和荟萃分析首选报告项目(PRISMA)协议进行。结果:人工智能具有较强的诊断效能,准确率、敏感性和特异性分别为87.37%、90.73%和91.34%。分类模型实现的汇总指标分别为90.46%、88.68%和94.08%。放射组学模型优于非放射组学模型,人工智能在关键指标上的表现与临床医生相当。三维(3D)质子密度脂肪抑制(PDFS)序列,切片深度< 2mm,尽管样本量小,但结果最有希望,有利于关节镜基准。尽管异质性高(I²> 90%)。结论:人工智能模型具有与临床医生相当的诊断性能,可以作为有价值的ACL撕裂检测辅助工具,有待于前瞻性验证。然而,实质性的异质性和有限的可解释性仍然是主要的挑战。需要进一步的研究和标准化的评估框架来支持临床整合。人工智能在MRI上诊断和分类前交叉韧带撕裂是否有效和准确?结果人工智能在ACL撕裂诊断中准确率(87.37%)、灵敏度(90.73%)、特异性(91.34%)高,匹配或超过临床医生。放射学模型优于非放射学方法。临床相关性AI可以提高ACL撕裂诊断的准确性,减少误诊并支持临床医生,特别是在资源有限的情况下。将其集成到临床工作流程中可以简化MRI解释,减少诊断延迟,并通过优化管理改善患者预后。
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
European Radiology
European Radiology 医学-核医学
CiteScore
11.60
自引率
8.50%
发文量
874
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: European Radiology (ER) continuously updates scientific knowledge in radiology by publication of strong original articles and state-of-the-art reviews written by leading radiologists. A well balanced combination of review articles, original papers, short communications from European radiological congresses and information on society matters makes ER an indispensable source for current information in this field. This is the Journal of the European Society of Radiology, and the official journal of a number of societies. From 2004-2008 supplements to European Radiology were published under its companion, European Radiology Supplements, ISSN 1613-3749.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信