Geoffrey A. Strange , Michael P. Feneley , David Prior , David Muller , Prasanna Venkataraman , Yiling Situ , Simon Stewart , David Playford
{"title":"临床医生与人工智能对严重主动脉狭窄的检测:一项回顾性临床队列研究","authors":"Geoffrey A. Strange , Michael P. Feneley , David Prior , David Muller , Prasanna Venkataraman , Yiling Situ , Simon Stewart , David Playford","doi":"10.1016/j.ahjo.2024.100485","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Many severe aortic stenosis (AS) cases are undetected and/or not considered for potentially life-saving treatment, with a persistent male-bias reported among those undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR). We evaluated the clinical value of a validated artificial intelligence automated alert system (AI-AAS) that detects severe AS from routine echocardiographic measurements. In a retrospective, clinical cohort of 21,749 adults investigated with transthoracic echocardiography at two tertiary-referral centres, we identified 4057 women (aged 61.6 ± 18.1 years) and 5132 men (60.8 ± 17.5 years) with native aortic valves. We firstly applied the AI-AAS to the cardiologists' reported echo measurements, to detect all AS cases, including guideline-defined severe AS. Two expert clinicians then independently reviewed the original clinical diagnosis/management based on the initial report. Initially, 218/9189 (2.4 %, 95%CI 2.1–2.7 %) severe AS cases were diagnosed. The AI-AAS subsequently increased this number by 158 (52 % women) to 376 cases (4.1 %, 95%CI 3.7–4.5 %) of severe guideline-defined AS. Overall, more women were under-diagnosed (92/169 [54.4 %] versus 80/207 [38.6 %] men – adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.21, 95%CI 0.10–0.45). Even when accounting for potential contraindications to valvular intervention, women were persistently less likely to be considered for valvular intervention (aOR 0.54, 95%CI 0.31–0.95) and/or underwent AVR (aOR 0.29, 95%CI 0.09–0.74). Our study suggests an AI-AAS application that is agnostic to gender, haemodynamic bias, symptoms, or clinical factors, provides an objective alert to severe forms of AS (including guideline-defined severe AS) following a routine echocardiogram, and has the potential to increase the number of people (especially women) directed towards more definitive treatment/specialist care.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":72158,"journal":{"name":"American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice","volume":"48 ","pages":"Article 100485"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Detection of severe aortic stenosis by clinicians versus artificial intelligence: A retrospective clinical cohort study\",\"authors\":\"Geoffrey A. Strange , Michael P. Feneley , David Prior , David Muller , Prasanna Venkataraman , Yiling Situ , Simon Stewart , David Playford\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ahjo.2024.100485\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Many severe aortic stenosis (AS) cases are undetected and/or not considered for potentially life-saving treatment, with a persistent male-bias reported among those undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR). We evaluated the clinical value of a validated artificial intelligence automated alert system (AI-AAS) that detects severe AS from routine echocardiographic measurements. In a retrospective, clinical cohort of 21,749 adults investigated with transthoracic echocardiography at two tertiary-referral centres, we identified 4057 women (aged 61.6 ± 18.1 years) and 5132 men (60.8 ± 17.5 years) with native aortic valves. We firstly applied the AI-AAS to the cardiologists' reported echo measurements, to detect all AS cases, including guideline-defined severe AS. Two expert clinicians then independently reviewed the original clinical diagnosis/management based on the initial report. Initially, 218/9189 (2.4 %, 95%CI 2.1–2.7 %) severe AS cases were diagnosed. The AI-AAS subsequently increased this number by 158 (52 % women) to 376 cases (4.1 %, 95%CI 3.7–4.5 %) of severe guideline-defined AS. Overall, more women were under-diagnosed (92/169 [54.4 %] versus 80/207 [38.6 %] men – adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.21, 95%CI 0.10–0.45). Even when accounting for potential contraindications to valvular intervention, women were persistently less likely to be considered for valvular intervention (aOR 0.54, 95%CI 0.31–0.95) and/or underwent AVR (aOR 0.29, 95%CI 0.09–0.74). Our study suggests an AI-AAS application that is agnostic to gender, haemodynamic bias, symptoms, or clinical factors, provides an objective alert to severe forms of AS (including guideline-defined severe AS) following a routine echocardiogram, and has the potential to increase the number of people (especially women) directed towards more definitive treatment/specialist care.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72158,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice\",\"volume\":\"48 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100485\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666602224001289\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666602224001289","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Detection of severe aortic stenosis by clinicians versus artificial intelligence: A retrospective clinical cohort study
Many severe aortic stenosis (AS) cases are undetected and/or not considered for potentially life-saving treatment, with a persistent male-bias reported among those undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR). We evaluated the clinical value of a validated artificial intelligence automated alert system (AI-AAS) that detects severe AS from routine echocardiographic measurements. In a retrospective, clinical cohort of 21,749 adults investigated with transthoracic echocardiography at two tertiary-referral centres, we identified 4057 women (aged 61.6 ± 18.1 years) and 5132 men (60.8 ± 17.5 years) with native aortic valves. We firstly applied the AI-AAS to the cardiologists' reported echo measurements, to detect all AS cases, including guideline-defined severe AS. Two expert clinicians then independently reviewed the original clinical diagnosis/management based on the initial report. Initially, 218/9189 (2.4 %, 95%CI 2.1–2.7 %) severe AS cases were diagnosed. The AI-AAS subsequently increased this number by 158 (52 % women) to 376 cases (4.1 %, 95%CI 3.7–4.5 %) of severe guideline-defined AS. Overall, more women were under-diagnosed (92/169 [54.4 %] versus 80/207 [38.6 %] men – adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.21, 95%CI 0.10–0.45). Even when accounting for potential contraindications to valvular intervention, women were persistently less likely to be considered for valvular intervention (aOR 0.54, 95%CI 0.31–0.95) and/or underwent AVR (aOR 0.29, 95%CI 0.09–0.74). Our study suggests an AI-AAS application that is agnostic to gender, haemodynamic bias, symptoms, or clinical factors, provides an objective alert to severe forms of AS (including guideline-defined severe AS) following a routine echocardiogram, and has the potential to increase the number of people (especially women) directed towards more definitive treatment/specialist care.