| Literature DB >> 34842959 |
Chenggong Yan1,2, Lingfeng Wang3,4, Jie Lin1,5, Jun Xu6, Tianjing Zhang4, Jin Qi3, Xiangying Li7, Wei Ni8, Guangyao Wu2,9, Jianbin Huang1, Yikai Xu10, Henry C Woodruff2,11, Philippe Lambin12,13.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: An accurate and rapid diagnosis is crucial for the appropriate treatment of pulmonary tuberculosis (TB). This study aims to develop an artificial intelligence (AI)-based fully automated CT image analysis system for detection, diagnosis, and burden quantification of pulmonary TB.Entities:
Keywords: Artificial intelligence; Computed tomography; Deep learning; Pulmonary tuberculosis; Thorax
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34842959 PMCID: PMC8628489 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-021-08365-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur Radiol ISSN: 0938-7994 Impact factor: 7.034
Fig. 1Flowchart of the study process for the training and testing datasets
Chest CT acquisition parameters of different datasets
| CT scanners | Development dataset | Test dataset (Yanling)* | Test dataset (Hainan) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Philips Brilliance iCT | Siemens SOMATOM Definition | GE Revolution | Siemens Emotion 16 | Philips Brilliance iCT | |
| Scan number | 519 | 336 | 37 | 99 | 86 |
| Tube voltage | 120 kVp | 110–120 kVp | 100 kVp | 130 kVp | 120 kVp |
| Tube current | Automatic mA modulation | Automatic mA modulation | Automatic mA modulation | 184 mA | Automatic mA modulation |
| Pitch | 0.991 | 1.2 | 0.992 | 1.2 | 0.993 |
| Detector configuration | 128 × 0.625 mm | 192 × 0.6 mm | 128 × 0.625 mm | 192 × 0.6 mm | 128 × 0.625 mm |
| Resolution | 512 × 512 | 512 × 512 | 512 × 512 | 512 × 512 | 512 × 512 |
| Section thickness | 1 mm | 1–1.5 mm | 1.25 mm | 1.5 mm | 5 mm |
*Scanning parameters from the NIH open-source dataset are not available
Fig. 2Illustration of the proposed cascading AI pipeline. The AI diagnostic system consists of four subsystems, which provides consistent visual descriptions: (1) screening to distinguish between normal and abnormal CT images, (2) object detection and localization of pulmonary infectious lesions, (3) diagnostic assessment of radiological features (6 types) and TB activity, and (4) severity assessment
Fig. 3CNN architecture of a deep learning system for slice selection and disease evaluation. The neural network architecture of the subsystem is based on Attention Branch ResNet and Grad-CAM. The convolution (Conv) layers are used to filter the input full CT scan and extract effective features
Fig. 4a–g Performance of the AI system for classification. a Normalized confusion matrices of multiclass critical imaging feature classification for the validation and test datasets. b Normalized confusion matrices of disease activity prediction for the test datasets. The shaded cells indicate the correct results obtained by the AI system
Performance of the AI model for classification and diagnosis in the testing phase
| Test set (dataset 2) | Test set (dataset 3) | Test set (dataset 4) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recall (%) | Precision (%) | F1 score | Recall (%) | Precision (%) | F1 score | Recall (%) | Precision (%) | F1 score | |
| Cavitation | 88.89% | 100.00% | 94.12% | 86.85% | 100.00% | 92.96% | 86.08% | 95.77% | 90.67% |
| Consolidation | 80.77% | 87.50% | 84.00% | 89.55% | 87.50% | 88.51% | 88.89% | 72.73% | 80.00% |
| Centrilobular and tree-in-bud | 94.95% | 91.59% | 93.24% | 87.96% | 91.59% | 89.74% | 83.76% | 92.65% | 87.98% |
| Clusters of nodules | 82.14% | 69.70% | 75.41% | 86.67% | 69.70% | 77.26% | 81.32% | 67.27% | 73.63% |
| Fibronodular scarring | 84.44% | 97.44% | 90.48% | 86.35% | 97.44% | 91.56% | 89.55% | 70.59% | 78.95% |
| Calcified granulomas | 92.19% | 94.15% | 93.16% | 88.07% | 94.15% | 91.01% | 88.14% | 94.49% | 91.20% |
| Active/Inactive | 100.00% | 92.68% | 96.20% | 94.87% | 94.87% | 94.87% | 97.87% | 98.98% | 98.42% |
Note. Data in brackets are 95% confidence interval
AI artificial intelligence
Fig. 5a AI-identified suspicious infectious areas on images of severe and non-severe disease. Pseudocolor map represents the three-dimensional reconstruction of the lesion. b Boxplots comparing TB scores per lobe between severe and non-severe patients for the validation and test datasets
Correlation coefficient (r) of AI quantified TB score and radiologist-estimated subjective scores of the lung lobes
| Validation set | Test set (Yanling) | Test set (Haikou) | Test set (NIH) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LUL | 0.713 | 0.655 | 0.652 | 0.762 |
| LLL | 0.649 | 0.582 | 0.579 | 0.692 |
| RUL | 0.723 | 0.542 | 0.660 | 0.564 |
| RML | 0.624 | 0.531 | 0.600 | 0.402 |
| RLL | 0.545 | 0.534 | 0.580 | 0.503 |
AI artificial intelligence, LUL left upper lobe, LLL left lower lobe, RUL right upper lobe, RML left middle lobe, RLL right lower lobe, TB tuberculosis
Fig. 6Example of chest CT images of patients with pulmonary TB and performance of our AI model