Julian Betancur1, Lien-Hsin Hu1, Frederic Commandeur1, Tali Sharir2,3, Andrew J Einstein4,5, Mathews B Fish6, Terrence D Ruddy7, Philipp A Kaufmann8, Albert J Sinusas9, Edward J Miller9, Timothy M Bateman10, Sharmila Dorbala11, Marcelo Di Carli11, Guido Germano1, Yuka Otaki1, Joanna X Liang1, Balaji K Tamarappoo1, Damini Dey1, Daniel S Berman1, Piotr J Slomka12. 1. Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Imaging, and Departments of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California. 2. Department of Nuclear Cardiology, Assuta Medical Centers, Tel Aviv, Israel. 3. Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheba, Israel. 4. Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center and New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York. 5. Department of Radiology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center and New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York. 6. Oregon Heart and Vascular Institute, Sacred Heart Medical Center, Springfield, Oregon. 7. Division of Cardiology, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 8. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Cardiac Imaging, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. 9. Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut. 10. Cardiovascular Imaging Technologies LLC, Kansas City, Missouri; and. 11. Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 12. Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Imaging, and Departments of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California piotr.slomka@cshs.org.
Abstract
Combined analysis of SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) performed with a solid-state camera on patients in 2 positions (semiupright, supine) is routinely used to mitigate attenuation artifacts. We evaluated the prediction of obstructive disease from combined analysis of semiupright and supine stress MPI by deep learning (DL) as compared with standard combined total perfusion deficit (TPD). Methods: 1,160 patients without known coronary artery disease (64% male) were studied. Patients underwent stress 99mTc-sestamibi MPI with new-generation solid-state SPECT scanners in 4 different centers. All patients had on-site clinical reads and invasive coronary angiography correlations within 6 mo of MPI. Obstructive disease was defined as at least 70% narrowing of the 3 major coronary arteries and at least 50% for the left main coronary artery. Images were quantified at Cedars-Sinai. The left ventricular myocardium was segmented using standard clinical nuclear cardiology software. The contour placement was verified by an experienced technologist. Combined stress TPD was computed using sex- and camera-specific normal limits. DL was trained using polar distributions of normalized radiotracer counts, hypoperfusion defects, and hypoperfusion severities and was evaluated for prediction of obstructive disease in a novel leave-one-center-out cross-validation procedure equivalent to external validation. During the validation procedure, 4 DL models were trained using data from 3 centers and then evaluated on the 1 center left aside. Predictions for each center were merged to have an overall estimation of the multicenter performance. Results: 718 (62%) patients and 1,272 of 3,480 (37%) arteries had obstructive disease. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve for prediction of disease on a per-patient and per-vessel basis by DL was higher than for combined TPD (per-patient, 0.81 vs. 0.78; per-vessel, 0.77 vs. 0.73; P < 0.001). With the DL cutoff set to exhibit the same specificity as the standard cutoff for combined TPD, per-patient sensitivity improved from 61.8% (TPD) to 65.6% (DL) (P < 0.05), and per-vessel sensitivity improved from 54.6% (TPD) to 59.1% (DL) (P < 0.01). With the threshold matched to the specificity of a normal clinical read (56.3%), DL had a sensitivity of 84.8%, versus 82.6% for an on-site clinical read (P = 0.3). Conclusion: DL improves automatic interpretation of MPI as compared with current quantitative methods.
Combined analysis of SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) performed with a solid-state camera on patients in 2 positions (semiupright, supine) is routinely used to mitigate attenuation artifacts. We evaluated the prediction of obstructive disease from combined analysis of semiupright and supine stress MPI by deep learning (DL) as compared with standard combined total perfusion deficit (TPD). Methods: 1,160 patients without known coronary artery disease (64% male) were studied. Patients underwent stress 99mTc-sestamibi MPI with new-generation solid-state SPECT scanners in 4 different centers. All patients had on-site clinical reads and invasive coronary angiography correlations within 6 mo of MPI. Obstructive disease was defined as at least 70% narrowing of the 3 major coronary arteries and at least 50% for the left main coronary artery. Images were quantified at Cedars-Sinai. The left ventricular myocardium was segmented using standard clinical nuclear cardiology software. The contour placement was verified by an experienced technologist. Combined stress TPD was computed using sex- and camera-specific normal limits. DL was trained using polar distributions of normalized radiotracer counts, hypoperfusion defects, and hypoperfusion severities and was evaluated for prediction of obstructive disease in a novel leave-one-center-out cross-validation procedure equivalent to external validation. During the validation procedure, 4 DL models were trained using data from 3 centers and then evaluated on the 1 center left aside. Predictions for each center were merged to have an overall estimation of the multicenter performance. Results: 718 (62%) patients and 1,272 of 3,480 (37%) arteries had obstructive disease. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve for prediction of disease on a per-patient and per-vessel basis by DL was higher than for combined TPD (per-patient, 0.81 vs. 0.78; per-vessel, 0.77 vs. 0.73; P < 0.001). With the DL cutoff set to exhibit the same specificity as the standard cutoff for combined TPD, per-patient sensitivity improved from 61.8% (TPD) to 65.6% (DL) (P < 0.05), and per-vessel sensitivity improved from 54.6% (TPD) to 59.1% (DL) (P < 0.01). With the threshold matched to the specificity of a normal clinical read (56.3%), DL had a sensitivity of 84.8%, versus 82.6% for an on-site clinical read (P = 0.3). Conclusion: DL improves automatic interpretation of MPI as compared with current quantitative methods.
Authors: Piotr J Slomka; Hidetaka Nishina; Daniel S Berman; Cigdem Akincioglu; Aiden Abidov; John D Friedman; Sean W Hayes; Guido Germano Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2005 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Hidetaka Nishina; Piotr J Slomka; Aiden Abidov; Shunichi Yoda; Cigdem Akincioglu; Xingping Kang; Ishac Cohen; Sean W Hayes; John D Friedman; Guido Germano; Daniel S Berman Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2006-01 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Guido Germano; Paul B Kavanagh; Piotr J Slomka; Serge D Van Kriekinge; Geoff Pollard; Daniel S Berman Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2007-07 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Sanjiv S Gambhir; Daniel S Berman; Jack Ziffer; Michael Nagler; Martin Sandler; Jim Patton; Brian Hutton; Tali Sharir; Shlomo Ben Haim; Simona Ben Haim Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Pim A L Tonino; William F Fearon; Bernard De Bruyne; Keith G Oldroyd; Massoud A Leesar; Peter N Ver Lee; Philip A Maccarthy; Marcel Van't Veer; Nico H J Pijls Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2010-06-22 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Ryo Nakazato; Balaji K Tamarappoo; Xingping Kang; Arik Wolak; Faith Kite; Sean W Hayes; Louise E J Thomson; John D Friedman; Daniel S Berman; Piotr J Slomka Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2010-10-18 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Yuan Xu; Paul Kavanagh; Mathews Fish; James Gerlach; Amit Ramesh; Mark Lemley; Sean Hayes; Daniel S Berman; Guido Germano; Piotr J Slomka Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2009-08-18 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: S E Bleeker; H A Moll; E W Steyerberg; A R T Donders; G Derksen-Lubsen; D E Grobbee; K G M Moons Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Robert J H Miller; Ananya Singh; Yuka Otaki; Balaji K Tamarappoo; Paul Kavanagh; Tejas Parekh; Lien-Hsin Hu; Heidi Gransar; Tali Sharir; Andrew J Einstein; Mathews B Fish; Terrence D Ruddy; Philipp A Kaufmann; Albert J Sinusas; Edward J Miller; Timothy M Bateman; Sharmila Dorbala; Marcelo F Di Carli; Joanna X Liang; Damini Dey; Daniel S Berman; Piotr J Slomka Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2022-10-04 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Partho P Sengupta; Sirish Shrestha; Béatrice Berthon; Emmanuel Messas; Erwan Donal; Geoffrey H Tison; James K Min; Jan D'hooge; Jens-Uwe Voigt; Joel Dudley; Johan W Verjans; Khader Shameer; Kipp Johnson; Lasse Lovstakken; Mahdi Tabassian; Marco Piccirilli; Mathieu Pernot; Naveena Yanamala; Nicolas Duchateau; Nobuyuki Kagiyama; Olivier Bernard; Piotr Slomka; Rahul Deo; Rima Arnaout Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2020-09
Authors: Piotr J Slomka; Jonathan B Moody; Robert J H Miller; Jennifer M Renaud; Edward P Ficaro; Ernest V Garcia Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2020-10-16 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Yuka Otaki; Ananya Singh; Paul Kavanagh; Robert J H Miller; Tejas Parekh; Balaji K Tamarappoo; Tali Sharir; Andrew J Einstein; Mathews B Fish; Terrence D Ruddy; Philipp A Kaufmann; Albert J Sinusas; Edward J Miller; Timothy M Bateman; Sharmila Dorbala; Marcelo Di Carli; Sebastien Cadet; Joanna X Liang; Damini Dey; Daniel S Berman; Piotr J Slomka Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2021-07-14