| Literature DB >> 34463778 |
Tom Finck1, David Schinz2, Lioba Grundl2, Rami Eisawy3,4, Mehmet Yiğitsoy4, Julia Moosbauer4, Claus Zimmer2, Franz Pfister4, Benedikt Wiestler2.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Advanced machine-learning (ML) techniques can potentially detect the entire spectrum of pathology through deviations from a learned norm. We investigated the utility of a weakly supervised ML tool to detect characteristic findings related to ischemic stroke in head CT and provide subsequent patient triage.Entities:
Keywords: Artificial intelligence; Computed tomography; Emergency imaging; Machine learning; Stroke
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34463778 PMCID: PMC9187535 DOI: 10.1007/s00062-021-01081-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clin Neuroradiol ISSN: 1869-1439 Impact factor: 3.156
Fig. 1Flow-chart illustrating the triage performance of the algorithm. Definite ratings were given in 77/111 (69.4%) patients with no false-positives or false-negatives in the case of definite ratings
Fig. 3Case examples for inconclusive ratings. Cases 2 (HVS) and 3 (Thalamic Infarct) show scans where the underlying pathology was not adequately detected in the anomaly maps (segmentations of anomalous findings in pink). Case 1 shows partial detection of the underlying HVS that did not reach the threshold for correct patient categorization as pathological. DWM deep white matter, HVS hyperdense vessel sign, MCA middle cerebral artery
Given are the numbers of patients according to their labels with the respective share of definitely labelled (normal/pathological) and inconclusively labelled scans for each class
| Ground Truth | All | Definite rating | Inconclusive rating | % of definite ratings | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Normal | 32 | 13 | 19 | 0.14 | 40.6 |
| Ischemia—chronic | 22 | 20 | 2 | < 0.0001 | 90.9 |
| Ischemia—subacute | 22 | 20 | 2 | < 0.0001 | 90.9 |
| HVS | 28 | 19 | 9 | 0.002 | 67.9 |
| Lacunary DWM infarct | 7 | 5 | 2 | 0.13 | 71.4 |
| All pathological | 79 | 64 | 15 | < 0.0001 | 81.0 |
HVS hyperdense vessel sign, DWM deep white matter
Given is the diagnostic accuracy to discern normal scans from scans with stroke findings and subgroups thereof
| AUC (95% CI) | Anomaly score | |
|---|---|---|
| Normal | – | 0.257 ± 0.249 |
| All pathological | 0.979 (0.968–1.00) | 0.912 ± 0.157a |
| Ischemia—chronic | 0.997 (0.989–1.00) | 0.966 ± 0.07a |
| Ischemia—subacute | 0.986 (0.957–1.00) | 0.934 ± 0.120a |
| HVS | 0.981 (0.952–1.00) | 0.878 ± 0.215a |
| Lacunar DWM infarct | 0.991 (0.968–1.00) | 0.899 ± 0.124a |
HVS hyperdense vessel sign, DWM deep white matter, AUC Area under the curve, CI Confidence interval
aSignificantly different from the anomaly scores of normal scans
Given are the metrics used for calculating the diagnostic accuracy in the study cohort
| Ground truth | ||
|---|---|---|
| Algorithm output | Stroke findings present | Stroke findings absent |
| Pathological | 64 | 0 |
| Inconclusive | 15 | 19 |
| Normal | 0 | 13 |
Fig. 2Case examples for correct detection and patient labeling in subacute ischemia (cases 1 and 2), chronic ischemia (Case 3), lacunar DWM infarcts (Case 4) and HVS (Case 5). Shown are the raw CT scans (top panel) with the corresponding anomaly maps (lower panel, segmentations of anomalous findings in pink). DWM deep white matter, HVS hyperdense vessel sign, MCA middle cerebral artery, PCA posterior cerebral artery