| Literature DB >> 35572825 |
Kunpeng Zhang1, Yan Gao2, Junwei Lv2, Jian Li2, Jingli Liu1.
Abstract
To evaluate the clinical application effect of spiral computed tomography (CT) three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction based on artificial intelligence in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), a CT 3D reconstruction model based on deep convolutional neural networks (DCNN) was established in this research, which was compared with the model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) and used in clinical practice. Then, 62 patients with aortic stenosis (AS) who underwent TAVI surgery were recruited as the research objects. The accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the multislice spiral CT scan (MSCT) and transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) in predicting the type of TAVI surgical valve were compared and analyzed. The results showed that the mean absolute error (MAE) (0.01) and root mean square error (RMSE) (0.086) of the MBIR model were higher than the reconstruction model in this research. The structural similarity (SSIM) (0.831) and peak signal-to noise ratio (PSNR) (32.77 dB) of the MBIR model were lower than the reconstruction model, and the differences were considerable (P < 0.05). Of the valve models selected based on the TTE measurement results, 35 cases were accurately predicted and 27 cases were incorrectly predicted. The accuracy of MSCT was 87.1%, the specificity was 98.84%, and the sensitivity was 92.87%; all of which were significantly higher than TTE (P < 0.05). In summary, compared with the MBIR reconstruction model, the imaging results of the model established in this research were closer to the real image. Compared with TTE, MSCT had higher accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity and can provide more accurate preoperative predictions for patients undergoing TAVI surgery.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35572825 PMCID: PMC9095377 DOI: 10.1155/2022/5794681
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Math Methods Med ISSN: 1748-670X Impact factor: 2.809
Figure 1Schematic diagram of X-ray attenuation.
Figure 2CT 3D reconstruction model framework.
Figure 3Model performance evaluation. (a) Showed the MAE and RMSE; (b) showed the SSIM and PSNR. ∗ indicated that the difference was significant compared to the reconstruction model in this research (P < 0.05).
Figure 4Heart CT loss curve.
Figure 53D reconstruction of the cross-sectional CT image of the heart. (a) Showed the real image; (b) showed the image processed by the reconstruction model proposed; (c) showed the image processed by the MBIR model.
Figure 6Measurement results of the aortic valve annulus diameter.
Figure 7Comparison of MSCT and TTE measurement results. (a) Showed the TAVI operation results; (b) showed the comparison of MSCT and TTE measurement results. ∗ indicated that TTE was considerable compared to MSCT (P < 0.05).
Figure 8ROC curve for predicting the accuracy of valve models. (a) MSCT; (b) TTE.