基于人工智能的全自动心肌疤痕量化在急性心肌梗死后诊断和预后分层中的应用

T. Lange, T. Stiermaier, S. Backhaus, P. Boom, J. Kowallick, J. Lotz, S. Kutty, B. Bigalke, M. Gutberlet, S. Waha-Thiele, S. Desch, G. Hasenfuss, H. Thiele, I. Eitel, A. Schuster
{"title":"基于人工智能的全自动心肌疤痕量化在急性心肌梗死后诊断和预后分层中的应用","authors":"T. Lange, T. Stiermaier, S. Backhaus, P. Boom, J. Kowallick, J. Lotz, S. Kutty, B. Bigalke, M. Gutberlet, S. Waha-Thiele, S. Desch, G. Hasenfuss, H. Thiele, I. Eitel, A. Schuster","doi":"10.1093/EHJCI/JEAA356.299","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \n Type of funding sources: None.\n Background Myocardial infarct size (IS) remains one of the strongest predictors of adverse cardiac events following acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) can precisely quantify the extent of injury but requires manual post-processing. Whether novel user-independent artificial intelligence (AI) based fully-automated analyses may facilitate clinical workflow and deliver similar information for risk stratification is unknown.\n Methods 913 AMI patients from two multi-center trials (AIDA-STEMI n = 704 with ST-elevation myocardial infarction [STEMI] and TATORT-NSTEMI n = 245 with non-ST-elevation-infarction [NSTEMI]) were included in this sub-study. IS was quantified manually using conventional software (Medis, Leiden Netherlands) and fully automated AI-based software (NeoSoft). All automatically detected IS were evaluated visually and corrected if necessary. Analyzed data were tested for agreement and prediction of major adverse clinical events (MACE) within one year after AMI.\n Results Automated and manual IS were similarly associated with outcome in cox regression analyses (HR 1.05 [95% CI 1-02-1.07] p < 0.001 for automated IS and HR 1.04 [95% CI 1.02-1.06]; p < 0.001 for manual IS). Comparison of C-statistics derived area under the curve (AUC) resulted in equivalent MACE prediction (AUC 0.65 for automated vs. AUC 0.66 for manual, p = 0.53). Manual correction of the automated scar detection did not lead to an improved risk prediction of MACE (AUC 0.65 to 0.66, p = 0.43). There was good agreement of automated and manually derived IS (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] 0.75 [0.07-0.89]) which was further improved after manual correction of the underlying contours (ICC 0.98 [0.97-0.98]).\n Conclusion AI-based software enables automated scar quantification with similar prognostic value compared to conventional methods in patients following AMI.\n","PeriodicalId":11963,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Echocardiography","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fully automated artificial intelligence-based myocardial scar quantification for diagnostic and prognostic stratification in patients following acute myocardial infarction\",\"authors\":\"T. Lange, T. Stiermaier, S. Backhaus, P. Boom, J. Kowallick, J. Lotz, S. Kutty, B. Bigalke, M. Gutberlet, S. Waha-Thiele, S. Desch, G. Hasenfuss, H. Thiele, I. Eitel, A. Schuster\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/EHJCI/JEAA356.299\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n \\n \\n Type of funding sources: None.\\n Background Myocardial infarct size (IS) remains one of the strongest predictors of adverse cardiac events following acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) can precisely quantify the extent of injury but requires manual post-processing. Whether novel user-independent artificial intelligence (AI) based fully-automated analyses may facilitate clinical workflow and deliver similar information for risk stratification is unknown.\\n Methods 913 AMI patients from two multi-center trials (AIDA-STEMI n = 704 with ST-elevation myocardial infarction [STEMI] and TATORT-NSTEMI n = 245 with non-ST-elevation-infarction [NSTEMI]) were included in this sub-study. IS was quantified manually using conventional software (Medis, Leiden Netherlands) and fully automated AI-based software (NeoSoft). All automatically detected IS were evaluated visually and corrected if necessary. Analyzed data were tested for agreement and prediction of major adverse clinical events (MACE) within one year after AMI.\\n Results Automated and manual IS were similarly associated with outcome in cox regression analyses (HR 1.05 [95% CI 1-02-1.07] p < 0.001 for automated IS and HR 1.04 [95% CI 1.02-1.06]; p < 0.001 for manual IS). Comparison of C-statistics derived area under the curve (AUC) resulted in equivalent MACE prediction (AUC 0.65 for automated vs. AUC 0.66 for manual, p = 0.53). Manual correction of the automated scar detection did not lead to an improved risk prediction of MACE (AUC 0.65 to 0.66, p = 0.43). There was good agreement of automated and manually derived IS (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] 0.75 [0.07-0.89]) which was further improved after manual correction of the underlying contours (ICC 0.98 [0.97-0.98]).\\n Conclusion AI-based software enables automated scar quantification with similar prognostic value compared to conventional methods in patients following AMI.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":11963,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Echocardiography\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-02-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Echocardiography\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/EHJCI/JEAA356.299\",\"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/JEAA356.299","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

资金来源类型:无。背景心肌梗死面积(IS)仍然是急性心肌梗死(AMI)后不良心脏事件的最强预测因子之一。晚期钆增强(LGE)心脏磁共振(CMR)可以精确量化损伤程度,但需要人工后处理。新的基于用户独立的人工智能(AI)的全自动分析是否可以促进临床工作流程并为风险分层提供类似的信息尚不清楚。方法将两项多中心试验(AIDA-STEMI n = 704 st段抬高型心肌梗死[STEMI]和TATORT-NSTEMI n = 245非st段抬高型心肌梗死[NSTEMI])的913例AMI患者纳入本亚研究。使用传统软件(mediis, Leiden Netherlands)和全自动人工智能软件(NeoSoft)对IS进行人工量化。对所有自动检测到的IS进行目视评估,必要时进行纠正。分析的数据用于AMI后一年内主要不良临床事件(MACE)的一致性和预测。结果在cox回归分析中,自动IS和手动IS与预后的相关性相似(HR 1.05 [95% CI 1-02-1.07] p < 0.001, HR 1.04 [95% CI 1.02-1.06];手动IS的p < 0.001)。比较c -统计导出的曲线下面积(AUC),得出等效的MACE预测(自动的AUC为0.65,手动的AUC为0.66,p = 0.53)。自动疤痕检测的人工校正并不能提高MACE的风险预测(AUC为0.65 ~ 0.66,p = 0.43)。自动和手动导出的IS(类内相关系数[ICC] 0.75[0.07-0.89])的一致性很好,在人工校正底层轮廓后进一步得到改善(ICC 0.98[0.97-0.98])。结论与传统方法相比,基于人工智能的软件能够自动量化AMI患者的疤痕,具有相似的预后价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Fully automated artificial intelligence-based myocardial scar quantification for diagnostic and prognostic stratification in patients following acute myocardial infarction
Type of funding sources: None. Background Myocardial infarct size (IS) remains one of the strongest predictors of adverse cardiac events following acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) can precisely quantify the extent of injury but requires manual post-processing. Whether novel user-independent artificial intelligence (AI) based fully-automated analyses may facilitate clinical workflow and deliver similar information for risk stratification is unknown. Methods 913 AMI patients from two multi-center trials (AIDA-STEMI n = 704 with ST-elevation myocardial infarction [STEMI] and TATORT-NSTEMI n = 245 with non-ST-elevation-infarction [NSTEMI]) were included in this sub-study. IS was quantified manually using conventional software (Medis, Leiden Netherlands) and fully automated AI-based software (NeoSoft). All automatically detected IS were evaluated visually and corrected if necessary. Analyzed data were tested for agreement and prediction of major adverse clinical events (MACE) within one year after AMI. Results Automated and manual IS were similarly associated with outcome in cox regression analyses (HR 1.05 [95% CI 1-02-1.07] p < 0.001 for automated IS and HR 1.04 [95% CI 1.02-1.06]; p < 0.001 for manual IS). Comparison of C-statistics derived area under the curve (AUC) resulted in equivalent MACE prediction (AUC 0.65 for automated vs. AUC 0.66 for manual, p = 0.53). Manual correction of the automated scar detection did not lead to an improved risk prediction of MACE (AUC 0.65 to 0.66, p = 0.43). There was good agreement of automated and manually derived IS (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] 0.75 [0.07-0.89]) which was further improved after manual correction of the underlying contours (ICC 0.98 [0.97-0.98]). Conclusion AI-based software enables automated scar quantification with similar prognostic value compared to conventional methods in patients following AMI.
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