Deep Learning for Improved Precision and Reproducibility of Left Ventricular Strain in Echocardiography: A Test-Retest Study

医学 再现性 内科学 心脏病学 人工智能 试验装置 核医学 计算机科学 统计 数学
作者
Ivar Mjåland Salte,Andreas Østvik,Sindre Hellum Olaisen,Sigve Karlsen,Thomas Dahlslett,Erik Smistad,Torfinn Eriksen‐Volnes,Harald Brunvand,Kristina H. Haugaa,Thor Edvardsen,Håvard Dalen,Lasse Løvstakken,Bjørnar Grenne
出处
期刊:Journal of The American Society of Echocardiography [Elsevier]
卷期号:36 (7): 788-799 被引量:15
标识
DOI:10.1016/j.echo.2023.02.017
摘要

•Deep-learning AI provides efficient automated GLS measurements in echocardiograms.•Deep-learning AI produces consistent GLS measurements in repeated echocardiograms.•Automated GLS measurements using deep learning improve test-retest reproducibility. AimsAssessment of left ventricular (LV) function by echocardiography is hampered by modest test-retest reproducibility. A novel artificial intelligence (AI) method based on deep learning provides fully automated measurements of LV global longitudinal strain (GLS) and may improve the clinical utility of echocardiography by reducing user-related variability. The aim of this study was to assess within-patient test-retest reproducibility of LV GLS measured by the novel AI method in repeated echocardiograms recorded by different echocardiographers and to compare the results to manual measurements.MethodsTwo test-retest data sets (n = 40 and n = 32) were obtained at separate centers. Repeated recordings were acquired in immediate succession by 2 different echocardiographers at each center. For each data set, 4 readers measured GLS in both recordings using a semiautomatic method to construct test-retest interreader and intrareader scenarios. Agreement, mean absolute difference, and minimal detectable change (MDC) were compared to analyses by AI. In a subset of 10 patients, beat-to-beat variability in 3 cardiac cycles was assessed by 2 readers and AI.ResultsTest-retest variability was lower with AI compared with interreader scenarios (data set I: MDC = 3.7 vs 5.5, mean absolute difference = 1.4 vs 2.1, respectively; data set II: MDC = 3.9 vs 5.2, mean absolute difference = 1.6 vs 1.9, respectively; all P < .05). There was bias in GLS measurements in 13 of 24 test-retest interreader scenarios (largest bias, 3.2 strain units). In contrast, there was no bias in measurements by AI. Beat-to-beat MDCs were 1.5, 2.1, and 2.3 for AI and the 2 readers, respectively. Processing time for analyses of GLS by the AI method was 7.9 ± 2.8 seconds.ConclusionA fast AI method for automated measurements of LV GLS reduced test-retest variability and removed bias between readers in both test-retest data sets. By improving the precision and reproducibility, AI may increase the clinical utility of echocardiography. Assessment of left ventricular (LV) function by echocardiography is hampered by modest test-retest reproducibility. A novel artificial intelligence (AI) method based on deep learning provides fully automated measurements of LV global longitudinal strain (GLS) and may improve the clinical utility of echocardiography by reducing user-related variability. The aim of this study was to assess within-patient test-retest reproducibility of LV GLS measured by the novel AI method in repeated echocardiograms recorded by different echocardiographers and to compare the results to manual measurements. Two test-retest data sets (n = 40 and n = 32) were obtained at separate centers. Repeated recordings were acquired in immediate succession by 2 different echocardiographers at each center. For each data set, 4 readers measured GLS in both recordings using a semiautomatic method to construct test-retest interreader and intrareader scenarios. Agreement, mean absolute difference, and minimal detectable change (MDC) were compared to analyses by AI. In a subset of 10 patients, beat-to-beat variability in 3 cardiac cycles was assessed by 2 readers and AI. Test-retest variability was lower with AI compared with interreader scenarios (data set I: MDC = 3.7 vs 5.5, mean absolute difference = 1.4 vs 2.1, respectively; data set II: MDC = 3.9 vs 5.2, mean absolute difference = 1.6 vs 1.9, respectively; all P < .05). There was bias in GLS measurements in 13 of 24 test-retest interreader scenarios (largest bias, 3.2 strain units). In contrast, there was no bias in measurements by AI. Beat-to-beat MDCs were 1.5, 2.1, and 2.3 for AI and the 2 readers, respectively. Processing time for analyses of GLS by the AI method was 7.9 ± 2.8 seconds. A fast AI method for automated measurements of LV GLS reduced test-retest variability and removed bias between readers in both test-retest data sets. By improving the precision and reproducibility, AI may increase the clinical utility of echocardiography.
最长约 10秒,即可获得该文献文件

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
更新
大幅提高文件上传限制,最高150M (2024-4-1)

科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
mmyhn发布了新的文献求助10
1秒前
Leonardi给王雨薇的求助进行了留言
1秒前
cloud发布了新的文献求助10
2秒前
英俊的铭应助ww采纳,获得10
3秒前
esyncoms发布了新的文献求助10
3秒前
田様应助fanny采纳,获得10
3秒前
4秒前
GGBOND2024应助小张采纳,获得10
4秒前
5秒前
NexusExplorer应助朱荧荧采纳,获得10
6秒前
8秒前
Jasper应助jjkjkjkjj采纳,获得10
9秒前
9秒前
云中应助天真的半莲采纳,获得10
9秒前
10秒前
Qinqinasm完成签到,获得积分10
10秒前
10秒前
调研昵称发布了新的文献求助10
11秒前
搜集达人应助顺心绮兰采纳,获得10
12秒前
清萍红檀发布了新的文献求助10
13秒前
ww发布了新的文献求助10
14秒前
15秒前
15秒前
16秒前
华仔应助young采纳,获得10
16秒前
17秒前
云汐儿应助认真科研采纳,获得10
17秒前
Johann完成签到,获得积分10
17秒前
脑洞疼应助wm采纳,获得10
18秒前
科研通AI2S应助QQQQQQQ采纳,获得10
18秒前
19秒前
20秒前
小葡萄icon完成签到 ,获得积分10
21秒前
Leeny发布了新的文献求助10
22秒前
希望天下0贩的0应助Swan采纳,获得10
22秒前
22秒前
fanny完成签到,获得积分10
23秒前
苗修杰完成签到,获得积分10
23秒前
sb三百问给sb三百问的求助进行了留言
24秒前
24秒前
高分求助中
Sustainability in Tides Chemistry 2800
The Young builders of New china : the visit of the delegation of the WFDY to the Chinese People's Republic 1000
Rechtsphilosophie 1000
Bayesian Models of Cognition:Reverse Engineering the Mind 888
Le dégorgement réflexe des Acridiens 800
Defense against predation 800
Very-high-order BVD Schemes Using β-variable THINC Method 568
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 医学 生物 材料科学 工程类 有机化学 生物化学 物理 内科学 纳米技术 计算机科学 化学工程 复合材料 基因 遗传学 催化作用 物理化学 免疫学 量子力学 细胞生物学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 3136013
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 2786835
关于积分的说明 7779716
捐赠科研通 2443045
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 1298822
科研通“疑难数据库(出版商)”最低求助积分说明 625232
版权声明 600870