| Literature DB >> 35743380 |
Bum-Joo Cho1,2,3, Minwoo Lee4, Jiyong Han2, Soonil Kwon1, Mi Sun Oh4, Kyung-Ho Yu4, Byung-Chul Lee4, Ju Han Kim3, Chulho Kim5.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We investigated whether a deep learning algorithm applied to retinal fundoscopic images could predict cerebral white matter hyperintensity (WMH), as represented by a modified Fazekas scale (FS), on brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).Entities:
Keywords: Fazekas scale; cerebral small-vessel disease; deep learning; fundus photograph; white matter hyperintensity
Year: 2022 PMID: 35743380 PMCID: PMC9224833 DOI: 10.3390/jcm11123309
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Clin Med ISSN: 2077-0383 Impact factor: 4.964
Figure 1Flowchart of participant enrollment. #, number of photograph.
Composition of the fundus photograph dataset.
| Whole Dataset | Training Dataset | Test Dataset | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fundus N | Patients N | Fundus N | Patients N | Fundus N | Patients N | |
| Prediction of the presence of WMH | ||||||
| Overall | 3726 | 1892 | 3353 | 1703 | 373 | 189 |
| Absent WMH | 2024 | 1019 | 1821 | 917 | 203 | 102 |
| Present WMH | 1702 | 873 | 1532 | 786 | 170 | 87 |
| Prediction of Fazekas scale | ||||||
| Overall | 905 | 462 | 814 | 416 | 91 | 46 |
| Grade 0 | 303 | 154 | 272 | 138 | 31 | 16 |
| Grade 1 | 302 | 154 | 272 | 139 | 30 | 15 |
| Grade 2+ | 300 | 154 | 270 | 139 | 30 | 15 |
N, number; WMH, white matter hyperintensity.
Figure 2Receiver operating characteristic curves of deep learning models predicting the presence of white matter hyperintensity.
Figure 3Confusion matrices of the best-performing folds of (A) DenseNet-201 and (B) EfficientNet-B7 for the prediction of the presence of white matter hyperintensity.
Diagnostic performance of deep learning models predicting the presence of white matter hyperintensity.
| Model | Diagnostic Performance, % (95% CI) | AUC (95% CI) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sensitivity | Specificity | PPV | NPV | ||
| DenseNet-201 | 66.1 ± 8.8 | 71.3 ± 8.0 | 66.5 ± 4.1 | 71.8 ± 3.6 | 0.736 ± 0.030 |
| EfficientNet-B7 | 61.7 ± 9.8 | 73.9 ± 7.4 | 66.9 ± 3.5 | 70.1 ± 4.2 | 0.724 ± 0.026 |
Model performances are presented as percent (%). CI, confidence interval; PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value; AUC, area under the curve.
Diagnostic precision values predicting the presence of white matter hyperintensity in the 10-fold cross validation.
| Model | Fold 0 | Fold 1 | Fold 2 | Fold 3 | Fold 4 | Fold 5 | Fold 6 | Fold 7 | Fold 8 | Fold 9 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DenseNet-201 | 0.721 | 0.655 | 0.635 | 0.729 | 0.653 | 0.617 | 0.649 | 0.714 | 0.620 | 0.657 |
| EfficientNet-B7 | 0.674 | 0.628 | 0.692 | 0.714 | 0.689 | 0.626 | 0.692 | 0.710 | 0.626 | 0.643 |
Figure 4Confusion matrices of the best-performing folds on (A) DenseNet-201 and (B) EfficientNet-B7 for the FS grade prediction.
Figure 5Representative examples of salience maps showing the area of strong attention as red for FS grade 2+ over (A–C) original fundus images and (D–F) pre-processed images.