| Literature DB >> 34343890 |
Yassine Bouchareb1, Pegah Moradi Khaniabadi2, Faiza Al Kindi3, Humoud Al Dhuhli4, Isaac Shiri5, Habib Zaidi6, Arman Rahmim7.
Abstract
Artificial Intelligence (AI) methods have significant potential for diagnosis and prognosis of COVID-19 infections. Rapid identification of COVID-19 and its severity in individual patients is expected to enable better control of the disease individually and at-large. There has been remarkable interest by the scientific community in using imaging biomarkers to improve detection and management of COVID-19. Exploratory tools such as AI-based models may help explain the complex biological mechanisms and provide better understanding of the underlying pathophysiological processes. The present review focuses on AI-based COVID-19 studies as applies to chest x-ray (CXR) and computed tomography (CT) imaging modalities, and the associated challenges. Explicit radiomics, deep learning methods, and hybrid methods that combine both deep learning and explicit radiomics have the potential to enhance the ability and usefulness of radiological images to assist clinicians in the current COVID-19 pandemic. The aims of this review are: first, to outline COVID-19 AI-analysis workflows, including acquisition of data, feature selection, segmentation methods, feature extraction, and multi-variate model development and validation as appropriate for AI-based COVID-19 studies. Secondly, existing limitations of AI-based COVID-19 analyses are discussed, highlighting potential improvements that can be made. Finally, the impact of AI and radiomics methods and the associated clinical outcomes are summarized. In this review, pipelines that include the key steps for AI-based COVID-19 signatures identification are elaborated. Sample size, non-standard imaging protocols, segmentation, availability of public COVID-19 databases, combination of imaging and clinical information and full clinical validation remain major limitations and challenges. We conclude that AI-based assessment of CXR and CT images has significant potential as a viable pathway for the diagnosis, follow-up and prognosis of COVID-19.Entities:
Keywords: Artificial intelligence; COVID-19; Chest x-ray; Computed tomography; Deep learning; Deep radiomics; Radiomics
Year: 2021 PMID: 34343890 PMCID: PMC8291996 DOI: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2021.104665
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Biol Med ISSN: 0010-4825 Impact factor: 4.589
Fig. 1Conventional and AI-based radiology workflow in COVID-19.
Fig. 2Three CXR images of a patient diagnosed with COVID-19 at days (A) 4, (B) 14, and (C) 29 of admission to the Royal Hospital, Muscat, Oman. The images in these 3 dates indicate: (A) bilateral peripheral lower lobe opacities, (B) bilateral mostly peripheral consolidations in the middle and lower lung zones, and (C) bilateral reticular opacities in the middle and lower lung zones.
Fig. 3COVID-19 positive cases admitted at the Royal Hospital, Muscat, Oman; (A) A 57 year-old female admitted with COVID-19, admission day 24 with no wearable respiratory monitoring system. CT of the chest showing bilateral GGO with peripheral distribution; (B) A 63 year-old male patient admitted with COVID-19 with a history of desaturation. Images from a contrast enhanced CT of the thorax showing bilateral diffuse GGO; (C) A 78 year-old male admitted with severe bilateral COVID-19 pneumonia. CT shows bilateral peripheral GGO with prominent interstitial septae with crazy paving pattern; (D) A 59 year-old male patient with hypoxemia COVID-19. CT shows bilateral peripheral GGO with formation of peripheral bands sparing the subpleural area.
Fig. 4A 34 year-old male with COVID-19. (A) The first image was done on day15 from admission (day 19 from diagnosis). (B) The second image is done day 35 of admission (day 39 from diagnosis). The first image showing bilateral diffuse ground glass opacities. The follow-up showing improvement in the ground glass opacities but development of septal thickening and bands.
Summary of image acquisition techniques in published articles.
| Reference | Modality- Device model | Tube Voltage (kV) | Tube current | Slice thickness (mm) | Collimation (mm) | Matrix size | Pitch |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fang et al. (2020) | CT- Philips Brilliance iCT; Dutch Philips | 120 | 100–400 mA | 0.9–5 | 0.625 | 512 × 512. | 0.914 |
| Guiot et al. (2020) | CT- Siemens Edge Plus, GE Revolution CT, GE Brightspeed | STANDARD reconstruction (no mention of acquisition and reconstruction parameters) | |||||
| Li et al. (2020) | CT- Discovery CT750HD, GE Healthcare | 120 | 250–400 mA | 5 | – | – | – |
| Fang et al. (2020) | CT- 64: Somatom, Siemens | 120 | – | 1 | 0.6 | 256 × 128 | – |
| Liu et al. (2020) | CT- Hitachi Medical, Japan | 120 | 180–400 mA | 5 | 0.625 | 512 × 512 | 1.5 |
| Wang et al. (2020) | CT- 16-MDCT, SOMATOM Emotion16, | 120 | 300 mAs | 5 | 0.625–1.25 | – | – |
| Zeng et al. (2020) | CT- Light-speed; GEHealthcare, Chicago, IL | 120 | 100–250 mAs | – | – | – | – |
| Shi et al. (2020) | CT- SOMATOM | 120 | – | 1·5 or 1 and an interval of 1·5 or 1 | 0.6 | – | |
| Li et al. (2020) | CT | – | – | – | – | 512 × 512 | – |
| Zheng et al. (2020) | CT- GE Discovery CT750HD; GE Healthcare, Milwaukee, WI | 100 | 350 mA | 5 | 0.625 | 512 × 512 | 1.375 |
| Huang et al. (2020) | CT- Siemens, Germany; Philips, the | 120 | – | 1 or 1.5; and layer spacing, 1.5 | 0.6 | 128 × 128 | – |
| Juanjuan et al. (2020) | CT- 1212LightSpeed VCT (General Electric Medical Systems, | STANDARD protocol (no mention of acquisition and reconstruction parameters) | |||||
| Wei et al. (2020) | CT- NeuViz 128 | 120 | 150 | 5 | – | 512 × 512 | 1.2 |
| Zheng et al. (2020) | CT- Ingenuity Core128, Philips Medical Systems, Best, the Netherlands; Somatom Definition | 120 | – | 1.5 | – | 512 × 512 | – |
| Li et al. (2020) | CT- uCT 780, United Imaging; or Somatom Force, Siemens Healthcare | Multiplanar reformatting (MPR) technique. | |||||
A listing of AI-based published articles.
| Reference | Modality/Subjects | Segmentation | Feature Extraction | Type of Feature | Feature Selection/Derivation Methods | Model training | Model Validation | AI-based method | Task |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fang et al. (2020) | CT/46 COVID-19, and 29 other types of pneumonias | 2D/Manually/ITK-SNAP software (v. 3.6.0) | MATLAB (in-house developed tool-box) | Intensity-based statistical features, GLCM, | ML | SVM | 3-fold cross-validation | radiomics | Severity assessment |
| Guiot et al. (2020) | CT/181 COVID-19, 1200 non-COVID [ | 2D and 3D/RadiomiX (OncoRadiomics | RadiomiX(OncoRadiomics | Statistics, texture, and shape | ML | Multivariable logistic regression with Elastic Net regularization | 10-fold cross validation | radiomics | Detection |
| Autee et al. (2020) | CXR/868 COVID-19, | 2D/U-NET | – | – | DL | Multi-layer perceptron stacked ensembling approach | 5-fold cross validation | DL | Diagnosis |
| Shuo et al. (2020) | CT/723 COVID-19 | 3D/Automated/U-Net, V-Net, and 3D U-Net++ | – | – | DL | ResNet-50, Inception networks, DPN-92, and Attention ResNet-50 18 | AUC curve | DL | – |
| Liping et al. (2020) | CT | 3D/Manually/ITK-SNAP software | QAK software | Histogram, shape factors, GLCM, RLM, GLZSM | ML | LASSO | AUC, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity | radiomics | Diagnostic |
| Armando Ugo et al. (2020) | CXR [ | Manually/MaZda 4.6) | MaZda 4.6 | Gray level histogram analysis, co-occurrence matrix, and Wavelet transform | ML | Partial Least Square Discriminant Analysis (PLS-DA), Naïve Bayes (NB), Generalized Linear Model (GLM), Logistic Regression (LR), Fast Large Margin (FML), Decision Tree (DT), RF, Gradient Boosted Trees (GBT), artificial Neural Network (aNN), SVM | radiomics | Diagnostic | |
| Fang et al. (2020) | CT/56 COVID-19, 34 other types of viral pneumonia [ | 2D and 3D/Manually/uAI-Discover-NCP R001) | – | – | DL | variance analysis, spearman correlation analysis, and LASSO | – | DL | Prediction |
| Tang et al. (2020) | CT/176 COVID(non-severe or severe) | VB-net | uAI-Dicover-NCP | Infection volume, ratio of the whole lung, the volumes of GGO regions | ML | RF | 3-fold cross | radiomics | Severity assessment |
| Chen et al. (2020) | CT/51 COVID-19, 55 other disease | 3D/Automated/UNet++ | – | – | DL | UNet++ | – | DL | Detection |
| Li et al. (2020) | CT/400 COVID-19, 1396 Community acquired pneumonia, and 1173 non-pneumonia | 3D AND 2D/Automated/RestNet50 | – | DL | RestNet50 + Max pooling | AUC curve | DL | Diagnostic | |
| Hongmei et al. (2020) | CT/52 COVID-19 | 3D Slicer | 3D Slicer (version 4.10.0) | – | ML | LR,RF | 5-fold cross-validation | DL | Prediction |
| Zheng et al. (2020) | CT/313 COVID positive, 229 COVID negative | 3D/Automated/UNet | – | – | DL | DeCoVNet software | DeCoVNet | DL | Detection |
| Huang et al. (2020) | CT/89 COVID-19, 92 Non-COVID-19 | 3D/Manually/Lung Kit software (v. LK2.2) | PyRadiomics | Intensity statistics, shape features, GLCM, GLSZM, | ML | LR | – | radiomics | Detection |
| Juanjuan et al. (2020) | CT/148 COVID-19 | – | – | Shape, histogram, GLCM, GLRLM, GLSZM, and GLDM | ML | LASSO | – | radiomics | Prediction |
| Liu et al. (2020) | CT/115 COVID-19 and 435 non-COVID-19 | 3D/Manually/itk-SNAP, (v. 3.4.0) | PyRadiomics | First order statistics, shape-based features (3D), GLCM, GLRLM, GLSZM, and GLDM | ML | LASSO | AUC | radiomics | Diagnosis |
| Wei et al. (2020) | CT/89 COVID-19 | 3D/Automate/LK2.1 software package | PyRadiomics | Histogram, GLCM, GLSZM, | ML | multivariate logistic regression | ROC analyses | radiomics | Severity assessment |
| Das et al. (2020) | CXR/COVID-19 (+), pneumonia (+) but COVID-19 (−) | – | – | – | DL | SVM, Random Back propagation network, Adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system Convolutional neural networks VGGNet, Alexnet, Googlenet Inceptionnet V3 | Accuracy, f-measure, sensitivity, specificity, and kappa statistics | DL | Detection |
| Kabid et al. (2020) | CXR/non-COVID and COVID-19. | – | – | – | DL | Faster R–CNN | K-fold cross-validation | DL | |
| Singh et al. (2020) | CT/D1(233 COVID-19, 376 non-COVID-19) | – | Principal Component Analysis, Autoencoder, Variance based Selector | – | DL | VGG16, Deep CNN, SVM, ELM, OS-ELM | AUC | Deep radiomics | Detection |
| Narin et al. (2020) | CXR/50 COVID-19, 50 normal | – | – | – | DL | InceptionV3, ResNet50, InceptionV2 | 5-fold cross validation | DL | Detection |
| Sethy et al. (2020) | CXR/25 COVID-19, 25 normal | – | – | DL | AlexNet, DenseNet201, GoogleNet, InceptionV3, ResNet18, ResNet50, ResNet101, VGG16, XceptionNet, InceptionNetV2 | Accuracy, Sensitivity, Specificity, False positive rate (FPR), F1 Score, MCC and Kappa | DL | Detection | |
| Hemdan et al. (2020) | CXR/25 COVID-19, 25 normal | – | – | – | DL | VGG, DenseNet201, ResNetV2, Inception, InceptionResNetV2, Xceptio, MobileNetV2 | ROC | DL | Diagnostic |
| Apostolopoulos et al. (2020) | CXR/224 COVID-19, 504 normal | – | – | – | DL | VGG19, MobileNet, Inception, Xception, InceptionResNet | 10-fold-cross-validation | DL | Detection |
| Tang et al. (2020) | CT/52 CoVID-19 | 3D/automatically/3DSlicer, U-net | PyRadiomics | Shape, wavelet features | DL | L R, RF | 5-fold cross-validation | radiomics | Severity assessment |
| Zhang et al. (2021) | CT/507 sets of Suspected COVID [ | DL a built-in feature on InferScholar platform | PyRadiomics | First-order, shape, GLCM, GLRLM, GLSZM, NGTDM, GLDM | DL | SVM, multi-layer perceptron (MLP), logistic LR, XGBoost | 5-fold cross-validation | radiomics | Detection |
| Alqudah et al. (2019) | CXR/48 COVID-19 and 23 non-COVID-19 | ReLU layer | SVM | – | DL | AOCT-NET, SVM, RF | AUC | Deep radiomics | Detection |
| Basu et al. (2020) | CXR/302 COVID-19 and 108,948 normal | – | – | – | DL | AlexNet, VGGNet, RestNet | 5-fold cross-validation | DL | Severity assessment |
| Wenli et al. (2020) | CT/99 COVID-19 [ | Automated/U-net | – | ML | RF | AUC | Deep radiomics | Severity assessment | |
| Joon et al. (2021) | CXR/338 COVID-19 | – | – | – | DL | DenseNet-121 | AUC | DL | Prediction |
Fig. 6Radiologist and AI (COLI-NET) segmentation for whole lung and lesion segmentation for different stage of COVID-19 patients (from mild to severe).
Fig. 5A schematic diagram of COVID-19 AI-based analysis workflow, involving different parameters and options for (1) image acquisition, (2) image segmentation, (3) extraction of features, (4) dimensionality reduction, (5) ML/DL modeling, and (6) model validation. Only few examples of parameters/features/algorithms are mentioned.
Fig. 7Summary of AI-based methodology in COVID-19 studies.