基于机器学习的压力CMR对全自动LVEF的增量预测价值

T Pezel, S Toupin, T Hovasse, F Sanguineti, S Champagne, T Unterseeh, T Chitiboi, A Jacob, I Borgohain, P Sharma, P Garot, J Garot
{"title":"基于机器学习的压力CMR对全自动LVEF的增量预测价值","authors":"T Pezel, S Toupin, T Hovasse, F Sanguineti, S Champagne, T Unterseeh, T Chitiboi, A Jacob, I Borgohain, P Sharma, P Garot, J Garot","doi":"10.1093/ehjci/jead119.313","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Background Although some recent reports showed that fully automated artificial intelligence (AI)-based left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) measured at stress has good performance, its prognostic value during a stress CMR exam to predict outcomes is not well established. Aim To determine in patients undergoing stress CMR whether fully automated AI-based LVEF (LVEF-AI) measured at stress can provide incremental prognostic value to predict death. Methods Between 2016 and 2018, we conducted a longitudinal study including all consecutive patients referred for vasodilator stress CMR. LVEF-AI was assessed using AI-algorithm combines multiple deep learning networks for LV segmentation. The primary outcome was all-cause death defined by the French National Registry of Death. Cox regression was used to evaluate the association of stress LVEF-AI with death after adjustment for traditional risk factors. Results In 9,712 patients (66±15 years, 67% men), there was an excellent correlation between stress LVEF-AI measurement and LVEF measured by expert (LVEF-expert) (r=0.94, p<0.001). Using Bland–Altman analysis, we found that the difference between the mean LVEF-expert and the LVEF-AI group was −0.1% (−0.066–0.067), that was not statistically significant (p = 0.46). Stress LVEF-AI was associated with death (median [IQR] follow-up 4.5 [3.7–5.2] years) before and after adjustment for risk factors (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.84 [95% CI, 0.82–0.87] per 5% increment, p<0.001). Stress LVEF-AI had similar significant association with death occurrence compared with LVEF-expert. After adjustment, a lower stress LVEF-AI showed the greatest improvement in model discrimination and reclassification over and above traditional risk factors and stress CMR findings (C-statistic improvement: 0.11; NRI=0.250; IDI=0.049, all p<0.001; LR-test p<0.001), with a superior additional prognostic value than the LVEF-AI measured at rest. Conclusion AI-based fully automated LVEF measured at stress is independently associated with the occurrence of death in patients undergoing stress CMR, with an additional prognostic value above traditional risk factors, inducible ischemia and LGE.","PeriodicalId":11963,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Echocardiography","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Incremental prognostic value of fully-automatic LVEF by stress CMR using machine learning\",\"authors\":\"T Pezel, S Toupin, T Hovasse, F Sanguineti, S Champagne, T Unterseeh, T Chitiboi, A Jacob, I Borgohain, P Sharma, P Garot, J Garot\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ehjci/jead119.313\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Background Although some recent reports showed that fully automated artificial intelligence (AI)-based left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) measured at stress has good performance, its prognostic value during a stress CMR exam to predict outcomes is not well established. Aim To determine in patients undergoing stress CMR whether fully automated AI-based LVEF (LVEF-AI) measured at stress can provide incremental prognostic value to predict death. Methods Between 2016 and 2018, we conducted a longitudinal study including all consecutive patients referred for vasodilator stress CMR. LVEF-AI was assessed using AI-algorithm combines multiple deep learning networks for LV segmentation. The primary outcome was all-cause death defined by the French National Registry of Death. Cox regression was used to evaluate the association of stress LVEF-AI with death after adjustment for traditional risk factors. Results In 9,712 patients (66±15 years, 67% men), there was an excellent correlation between stress LVEF-AI measurement and LVEF measured by expert (LVEF-expert) (r=0.94, p<0.001). Using Bland–Altman analysis, we found that the difference between the mean LVEF-expert and the LVEF-AI group was −0.1% (−0.066–0.067), that was not statistically significant (p = 0.46). Stress LVEF-AI was associated with death (median [IQR] follow-up 4.5 [3.7–5.2] years) before and after adjustment for risk factors (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.84 [95% CI, 0.82–0.87] per 5% increment, p<0.001). Stress LVEF-AI had similar significant association with death occurrence compared with LVEF-expert. After adjustment, a lower stress LVEF-AI showed the greatest improvement in model discrimination and reclassification over and above traditional risk factors and stress CMR findings (C-statistic improvement: 0.11; NRI=0.250; IDI=0.049, all p<0.001; LR-test p<0.001), with a superior additional prognostic value than the LVEF-AI measured at rest. Conclusion AI-based fully automated LVEF measured at stress is independently associated with the occurrence of death in patients undergoing stress CMR, with an additional prognostic value above traditional risk factors, inducible ischemia and LGE.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11963,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Echocardiography\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Echocardiography\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjci/jead119.313\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Echocardiography","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjci/jead119.313","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

资金来源类型:无。尽管最近的一些报告显示,基于人工智能(AI)的全自动左室射血分数(LVEF)在压力下测量具有良好的性能,但其在压力CMR检查中预测预后的预后价值尚未得到很好的证实。目的探讨在应激CMR患者中,基于人工智能的全自动LVEF (LVEF- ai)在应激状态下的测量是否能提供预测死亡的增量预后价值。方法在2016年至2018年期间,我们进行了一项纵向研究,包括所有连续转诊的血管扩张剂应激CMR患者。LVEF-AI采用ai算法结合多个深度学习网络进行LV分割。主要结局是由法国国家死亡登记处定义的全因死亡。在校正传统危险因素后,采用Cox回归评估应激LVEF-AI与死亡的关系。结果9712例患者(66±15岁,男性67%),应激LVEF- ai测量与专家(LVEF-expert)测量的LVEF有极好的相关性(r=0.94, p<0.001)。通过Bland-Altman分析,我们发现LVEF-expert组与LVEF-AI组的平均差异为- 0.1%(- 0.066-0.067),差异无统计学意义(p = 0.46)。在调整危险因素前后,应激LVEF-AI与死亡相关(中位[IQR]随访4.5[3.7-5.2]年)(调整后的风险比[HR],每增加5%调整0.84 [95% CI, 0.82-0.87], p<0.001)。LVEF-AI与LVEF-expert相比,应激与死亡发生率有相似的显著相关性。调整后,较低的应激LVEF-AI在模型判别和再分类方面比传统危险因素和应激CMR结果改善最大(c -统计改善:0.11;个新名词= 0.250;IDI=0.049,均为p<0.001;lr测试p<0.001),与静止时测量的LVEF-AI相比,具有更好的附加预后价值。结论基于人工智能的应激下全自动LVEF测量与应激性CMR患者死亡发生独立相关,在传统危险因素、诱导性缺血和LGE之外具有额外的预后价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Incremental prognostic value of fully-automatic LVEF by stress CMR using machine learning
Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Background Although some recent reports showed that fully automated artificial intelligence (AI)-based left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) measured at stress has good performance, its prognostic value during a stress CMR exam to predict outcomes is not well established. Aim To determine in patients undergoing stress CMR whether fully automated AI-based LVEF (LVEF-AI) measured at stress can provide incremental prognostic value to predict death. Methods Between 2016 and 2018, we conducted a longitudinal study including all consecutive patients referred for vasodilator stress CMR. LVEF-AI was assessed using AI-algorithm combines multiple deep learning networks for LV segmentation. The primary outcome was all-cause death defined by the French National Registry of Death. Cox regression was used to evaluate the association of stress LVEF-AI with death after adjustment for traditional risk factors. Results In 9,712 patients (66±15 years, 67% men), there was an excellent correlation between stress LVEF-AI measurement and LVEF measured by expert (LVEF-expert) (r=0.94, p&lt;0.001). Using Bland–Altman analysis, we found that the difference between the mean LVEF-expert and the LVEF-AI group was −0.1% (−0.066–0.067), that was not statistically significant (p = 0.46). Stress LVEF-AI was associated with death (median [IQR] follow-up 4.5 [3.7–5.2] years) before and after adjustment for risk factors (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.84 [95% CI, 0.82–0.87] per 5% increment, p&lt;0.001). Stress LVEF-AI had similar significant association with death occurrence compared with LVEF-expert. After adjustment, a lower stress LVEF-AI showed the greatest improvement in model discrimination and reclassification over and above traditional risk factors and stress CMR findings (C-statistic improvement: 0.11; NRI=0.250; IDI=0.049, all p&lt;0.001; LR-test p&lt;0.001), with a superior additional prognostic value than the LVEF-AI measured at rest. Conclusion AI-based fully automated LVEF measured at stress is independently associated with the occurrence of death in patients undergoing stress CMR, with an additional prognostic value above traditional risk factors, inducible ischemia and LGE.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
European Journal of Echocardiography
European Journal of Echocardiography 医学-心血管系统
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
×
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