Literature DB >> 33742333

Analysis of Potential for User Errors in Mobile Deployment of Radiology Deep Learning for Cardiac Rhythm Device Detection.

Carl Sabottke1, Marc Breaux2, Rebecca Lee3, Adam Foreman4, Bradley Spieler5.   

Abstract

We examine how convolutional neural networks (CNNs) for cardiac rhythm device detection can exhibit failures in performance under suboptimal deployment scenarios and examine how medically adversarial image presentation can further impair neural network performance. We validated the publicly available Pacemaker-ID web server and mobile app on 43 local hospital emergency department (ED) cases of patients presenting with a cardiac rhythm device on anterior-posterior (AP) chest radiograph and assessed performance using Cohen's kappa coefficient for inter-rater reliability. To illustrate adversarial performance concerns, we then produced example CNN models using the 65,379 patient MIMIC-CXR chest radiograph retrospective database and evaluated performance with area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC). In retrospective review of 43 patients with cardiac rhythm devices on AP chest radiographs during our study period (January 1, 2020 to March 1, 2020), 74.4% (32/43) had device manufacturer information readily available within the electronic medical record. A total of 25.6% of patients (11/43) did not have this information documented in the patient chart and could ostensibly benefit from CNN-based identification of device manufacturer. For patients with known device manufacturer, the Pacemaker-ID prediction was accurate in 87.5% of cases (28/32). Mobile app accuracy varied from 62.5 to 93.75% depending on image capture settings and presentation. Cohen's kappa coefficient varied from 0.448 to 0.897 depending on mobile image capture conditions. For our additional analysis of medically adversarial performance failures with a DenseNet121 trained on MIMIC-CXR images, we showed that an AUROC of 0.9807 ± 0.0051 could be achieved on an example testing dataset while masking a 30% false positive rate in identification of cardiac rhythm devices versus clinically distinct entities such as vagal nerve stimulators. Despite the promise of CNN approaches for cardiac rhythm device analysis on chest radiographs, further study is warranted to assess potential for errors driven by user misuse when deploying these models to mobile devices as well as for cases when performance can be impaired by the presence of other support apparatuses.
© 2021. Society for Imaging Informatics in Medicine.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cardiac rhythm devices; Convolutional neural networks; Deep brain stimulators; Deep learning; Vagus nerve stimulators

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33742333      PMCID: PMC8329116          DOI: 10.1007/s10278-021-00443-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Digit Imaging        ISSN: 0897-1889            Impact factor:   4.903


  17 in total

1.  PhysioBank, PhysioToolkit, and PhysioNet: components of a new research resource for complex physiologic signals.

Authors:  A L Goldberger; L A Amaral; L Glass; J M Hausdorff; P C Ivanov; R G Mark; J E Mietus; G B Moody; C K Peng; H E Stanley
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2000-06-13       Impact factor: 29.690

2.  A simple algorithm for identifying negated findings and diseases in discharge summaries.

Authors:  W W Chapman; W Bridewell; P Hanbury; G F Cooper; B G Buchanan
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 6.317

3.  Chest Radiographs in Congestive Heart Failure: Visualizing Neural Network Learning.

Authors:  Jarrel C Y Seah; Jennifer S N Tang; Andy Kitchen; Frank Gaillard; Andrew F Dixon
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2018-11-06       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Sliding window adaptive histogram equalization of intraoral radiographs: effect on image quality.

Authors:  T Sund; A Møystad
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 2.419

5.  Cardiac rhythm device identification algorithm using X-Rays: CaRDIA-X.

Authors:  Sony Jacob; Muhammad A Shahzad; Rahul Maheshwari; Sidakpal S Panaich; Rajeev Aravindhakshan
Journal:  Heart Rhythm       Date:  2011-01-08       Impact factor: 6.343

6.  Present guidelines for device implantation: clinical considerations and clinical challenges from pacing, implantable cardiac defibrillator, and cardiac resynchronization therapy.

Authors:  Jeanne E Poole
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2014-01-21       Impact factor: 29.690

7.  Development of an Artificially Intelligent Mobile Phone Application to Identify Cardiac Devices on Chest Radiography.

Authors:  Michael Weinreich; Jay J Chudow; Brian Weinreich; Talia Krumerman; Tonusri Nag; Kusha Rahgozar; Eric Shulman; John Fisher; Kevin J Ferrick
Journal:  JACC Clin Electrophysiol       Date:  2019-09

8.  Assessing the Risks Associated with MRI in Patients with a Pacemaker or Defibrillator.

Authors:  Robert J Russo; Heather S Costa; Patricia D Silva; Jeffrey L Anderson; Aysha Arshad; Robert W W Biederman; Noel G Boyle; Jennifer V Frabizzio; Ulrika Birgersdotter-Green; Steven L Higgins; Rachel Lampert; Christian E Machado; Edward T Martin; Andrew L Rivard; Jason C Rubenstein; Raymond H M Schaerf; Jennifer D Schwartz; Dipan J Shah; Gery F Tomassoni; Gail T Tominaga; Allison E Tonkin; Seth Uretsky; Steven D Wolff
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2017-02-23       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 9.  Current applications of big data and machine learning in cardiology.

Authors:  Renato Cuocolo; Teresa Perillo; Eliana De Rosa; Lorenzo Ugga; Mario Petretta
Journal:  J Geriatr Cardiol       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 3.327

10.  Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic.

Authors:  Mary L McHugh
Journal:  Biochem Med (Zagreb)       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 2.313

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.