Literature DB >> 33511425

Diagnostic accuracy of stress-only myocardial perfusion SPECT improved by deep learning.

Hui Liu1,2,3,4, Jing Wu5,6, Edward J Miller7,5,8, Chi Liu5, Yi-Hwa Liu9,10,11,12.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Deep convolutional neural networks (CNN) for single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) has been used to improve the diagnostic accuracy of coronary artery disease (CAD). This study was to design and evaluate a deep learning (DL) approach to automatic diagnosis of myocardial perfusion abnormalities from stress-only MPI.
METHODS: The new DL approach developed for this study was compared to a conventional quantitative perfusion defect size (DS) method. A total of 37,243 patients (51.5% males) undergone stress 99mTc-Tetrofosmin or 99mTc-Sestamibi MPI were selected retrospectively from Yale New Haven Hospital. Patients were dichotomized as studies with normal (75.4%) or abnormal (24.6%) myocardial perfusion based on final diagnoses of clinical nuclear cardiologists. Stress myocardial perfusion defect size was calculated using Yale quantitative analytic software. A deep CNN was trained using the circumferential count profile maps derived from SPECT MPI and was evaluated for the diagnosis of perfusion abnormality with a 5-fold cross-validation approach. In each fold, 27,933, 1862 and 7448 patients were used as training, validation and testing datasets, respectively. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) was calculated and analyzed for all patients as well as for the eight sub-groups classified based on patient genders, quantitative algorithms, radioactive tracers and SPECT cameras.
RESULTS: The AUC value resulted from the DL method was significantly higher than that from the DS method (0.872 ± 0.002 vs. 0.838 ± 0.003, p < 0.01). Across the eight sub-groups, the DL method provided more consistent AUC values in terms of smaller standard deviation and higher diagnostic accuracy and specificity, but slightly lower sensitivity than the DS method (AUC: 0.865 ± 0.010 vs. 0.838 ± 0.019, Accuracy: 82.7% ± 2.5% vs. 78.5% ± 3.6%, Specificity: 84.9% ± 3.7% vs. 77.5% ± 6.5%, Sensitivity: 74.4% ± 4.2% vs. 79.8% ± 5.8%).
CONCLUSIONS: The incorporation of deep learning for stress-only MPI has a considerable potential to improve the diagnostic accuracy and consistency in the detection of myocardial perfusion abnormalities.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Coronary artery disease diagnosis; Deep learning; Heterogeneous population; Stress-only SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33511425     DOI: 10.1007/s00259-021-05202-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging        ISSN: 1619-7070            Impact factor:   9.236


  1 in total

Review 1.  Deep learning.

Authors:  Yann LeCun; Yoshua Bengio; Geoffrey Hinton
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2015-05-28       Impact factor: 49.962

  1 in total
  4 in total

1.  Deep Learning-Based Automated Diagnosis for Coronary Artery Disease Using SPECT-MPI Images.

Authors:  Nikolaos I Papandrianos; Anna Feleki; Elpiniki I Papageorgiou; Chiara Martini
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-07-05       Impact factor: 4.964

2.  Prediction of multivessel coronary artery disease and candidates for stress-only imaging using multivariable models with myocardial perfusion imaging.

Authors:  Yuji Kunita; Kenichi Nakajima; Tomoaki Nakata; Takashi Kudo; Seigo Kinuya
Journal:  Ann Nucl Med       Date:  2022-06-05       Impact factor: 2.258

Review 3.  A Narrative Review of the Classical and Modern Diagnostic Methods of the No-Reflow Phenomenon.

Authors:  Larisa Renata Pantea-Roșan; Simona Gabriela Bungau; Andrei-Flavius Radu; Vlad Alin Pantea; Mădălina Ioana Moisi; Cosmin Mihai Vesa; Tapan Behl; Aurelia Cristina Nechifor; Elena Emilia Babes; Manuela Stoicescu; Daniela Gitea; Diana Carina Iovanovici; Cristiana Bustea
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-08

4.  Using artificial intelligence in the development of diagnostic models of coronary artery disease with imaging markers: A scoping review.

Authors:  Xiao Wang; Junfeng Wang; Wenjun Wang; Mingxiang Zhu; Hua Guo; Junyu Ding; Jin Sun; Di Zhu; Yongjie Duan; Xu Chen; Peifang Zhang; Zhenzhou Wu; Kunlun He
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-10-04
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.