Carolina Río Bártulos, Lukas Pirl, Dennis Lier, Mathis Planert, Juliane Hohmann, Abdelouahed El Mountassir, Mohamed El Anwar, Philipp Wiggermann
{"title":"两种不同软件程序对疑似脑卒中患者进行 ASPECTS 自动评分的性能评估。","authors":"Carolina Río Bártulos, Lukas Pirl, Dennis Lier, Mathis Planert, Juliane Hohmann, Abdelouahed El Mountassir, Mohamed El Anwar, Philipp Wiggermann","doi":"10.3233/CH-238105","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The range of software available to radiologists has increased enormously with the advancement of AI. A good example of this is software to determine ASPECTS in the treatment of potential stroke patients.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>In this study, two software packages (eASPECTS from Brainomix and VIA_ASPECTS from Siemens) were tested and compared for their performance in the daily clinical routine of a maximum care provider with a 24/7 stroke unit.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 637 noncontrast CT images were obtained from consecutive patients with suspected stroke, of whom 73 were finally diagnosed with MCA infarction. Differences in agreement and quantification of agreement were analysed, as well as the correlation and sensitivity, specificity and accuracy compared to raters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared to VIA_ASPECTS, eASPECTS shows good agreement and strong correlation with the raters. VIA_ASPECTS has lower accuracy and low specificity than eASPECTS but a higher sensitivity.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both software products have the potential to be decision support tools for radiologists. There are, however, differences between the two software products in terms of their intended use.</p>","PeriodicalId":10425,"journal":{"name":"Clinical hemorheology and microcirculation","volume":" ","pages":"109-119"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Performance evaluation of two different software programs for automated ASPECTS scoring in patients with suspected stroke.\",\"authors\":\"Carolina Río Bártulos, Lukas Pirl, Dennis Lier, Mathis Planert, Juliane Hohmann, Abdelouahed El Mountassir, Mohamed El Anwar, Philipp Wiggermann\",\"doi\":\"10.3233/CH-238105\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The range of software available to radiologists has increased enormously with the advancement of AI. A good example of this is software to determine ASPECTS in the treatment of potential stroke patients.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>In this study, two software packages (eASPECTS from Brainomix and VIA_ASPECTS from Siemens) were tested and compared for their performance in the daily clinical routine of a maximum care provider with a 24/7 stroke unit.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 637 noncontrast CT images were obtained from consecutive patients with suspected stroke, of whom 73 were finally diagnosed with MCA infarction. Differences in agreement and quantification of agreement were analysed, as well as the correlation and sensitivity, specificity and accuracy compared to raters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared to VIA_ASPECTS, eASPECTS shows good agreement and strong correlation with the raters. VIA_ASPECTS has lower accuracy and low specificity than eASPECTS but a higher sensitivity.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both software products have the potential to be decision support tools for radiologists. There are, however, differences between the two software products in terms of their intended use.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10425,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical hemorheology and microcirculation\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"109-119\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical hemorheology and microcirculation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3233/CH-238105\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical hemorheology and microcirculation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/CH-238105","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Performance evaluation of two different software programs for automated ASPECTS scoring in patients with suspected stroke.
Background: The range of software available to radiologists has increased enormously with the advancement of AI. A good example of this is software to determine ASPECTS in the treatment of potential stroke patients.
Objective: In this study, two software packages (eASPECTS from Brainomix and VIA_ASPECTS from Siemens) were tested and compared for their performance in the daily clinical routine of a maximum care provider with a 24/7 stroke unit.
Methods: A total of 637 noncontrast CT images were obtained from consecutive patients with suspected stroke, of whom 73 were finally diagnosed with MCA infarction. Differences in agreement and quantification of agreement were analysed, as well as the correlation and sensitivity, specificity and accuracy compared to raters.
Results: Compared to VIA_ASPECTS, eASPECTS shows good agreement and strong correlation with the raters. VIA_ASPECTS has lower accuracy and low specificity than eASPECTS but a higher sensitivity.
Conclusion: Both software products have the potential to be decision support tools for radiologists. There are, however, differences between the two software products in terms of their intended use.
期刊介绍：
Clinical Hemorheology and Microcirculation, a peer-reviewed international scientific journal, serves as an aid to understanding the flow properties of blood and the relationship to normal and abnormal physiology. The rapidly expanding science of hemorheology concerns blood, its components and the blood vessels with which blood interacts. It includes perihemorheology, i.e., the rheology of fluid and structures in the perivascular and interstitial spaces as well as the lymphatic system. The clinical aspects include pathogenesis, symptomatology and diagnostic methods, and the fields of prophylaxis and therapy in all branches of medicine and surgery, pharmacology and drug research.
The endeavour of the Editors-in-Chief and publishers of Clinical Hemorheology and Microcirculation is to bring together contributions from those working in various fields related to blood flow all over the world. The editors of Clinical Hemorheology and Microcirculation are from those countries in Europe, Asia, Australia and America where appreciable work in clinical hemorheology and microcirculation is being carried out. Each editor takes responsibility to decide on the acceptance of a manuscript. He is required to have the manuscript appraised by two referees and may be one of them himself. The executive editorial office, to which the manuscripts have been submitted, is responsible for rapid handling of the reviewing process.
Clinical Hemorheology and Microcirculation accepts original papers, brief communications, mini-reports and letters to the Editors-in-Chief. Review articles, providing general views and new insights into related subjects, are regularly invited by the Editors-in-Chief. Proceedings of international and national conferences on clinical hemorheology (in original form or as abstracts) complete the range of editorial features.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
