Cargando…
Development and external validation of automated detection, classification, and localization of ankle fractures: inside the black box of a convolutional neural network (CNN)
PURPOSE: Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) are increasingly being developed for automated fracture detection in orthopaedic trauma surgery. Studies to date, however, are limited to providing classification based on the entire image—and only produce heatmaps for approximate fracture localization i...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10175446/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36374292 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-022-02136-1 |
_version_ | 1785040214802038784 |
---|---|
author | Prijs, Jasper Liao, Zhibin To, Minh-Son Verjans, Johan Jutte, Paul C. Stirler, Vincent Olczak, Jakub Gordon, Max Guss, Daniel DiGiovanni, Christopher W. Jaarsma, Ruurd L. IJpma, Frank F. A. Doornberg, Job N. |
author_facet | Prijs, Jasper Liao, Zhibin To, Minh-Son Verjans, Johan Jutte, Paul C. Stirler, Vincent Olczak, Jakub Gordon, Max Guss, Daniel DiGiovanni, Christopher W. Jaarsma, Ruurd L. IJpma, Frank F. A. Doornberg, Job N. |
author_sort | Prijs, Jasper |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) are increasingly being developed for automated fracture detection in orthopaedic trauma surgery. Studies to date, however, are limited to providing classification based on the entire image—and only produce heatmaps for approximate fracture localization instead of delineating exact fracture morphology. Therefore, we aimed to answer (1) what is the performance of a CNN that detects, classifies, localizes, and segments an ankle fracture, and (2) would this be externally valid? METHODS: The training set included 326 isolated fibula fractures and 423 non-fracture radiographs. The Detectron2 implementation of the Mask R-CNN was trained with labelled and annotated radiographs. The internal validation (or ‘test set’) and external validation sets consisted of 300 and 334 radiographs, respectively. Consensus agreement between three experienced fellowship-trained trauma surgeons was defined as the ground truth label. Diagnostic accuracy and area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC) were used to assess classification performance. The Intersection over Union (IoU) was used to quantify accuracy of the segmentation predictions by the CNN, where a value of 0.5 is generally considered an adequate segmentation. RESULTS: The final CNN was able to classify fibula fractures according to four classes (Danis-Weber A, B, C and No Fracture) with AUC values ranging from 0.93 to 0.99. Diagnostic accuracy was 89% on the test set with average sensitivity of 89% and specificity of 96%. External validity was 89–90% accurate on a set of radiographs from a different hospital. Accuracies/AUCs observed were 100/0.99 for the ‘No Fracture’ class, 92/0.99 for ‘Weber B’, 88/0.93 for ‘Weber C’, and 76/0.97 for ‘Weber A’. For the fracture bounding box prediction by the CNN, a mean IoU of 0.65 (SD ± 0.16) was observed. The fracture segmentation predictions by the CNN resulted in a mean IoU of 0.47 (SD ± 0.17). CONCLUSIONS: This study presents a look into the ‘black box’ of CNNs and represents the first automated delineation (segmentation) of fracture lines on (ankle) radiographs. The AUC values presented in this paper indicate good discriminatory capability of the CNN and substantiate further study of CNNs in detecting and classifying ankle fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II, Diagnostic imaging study. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10175446 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-101754462023-05-13 Development and external validation of automated detection, classification, and localization of ankle fractures: inside the black box of a convolutional neural network (CNN) Prijs, Jasper Liao, Zhibin To, Minh-Son Verjans, Johan Jutte, Paul C. Stirler, Vincent Olczak, Jakub Gordon, Max Guss, Daniel DiGiovanni, Christopher W. Jaarsma, Ruurd L. IJpma, Frank F. A. Doornberg, Job N. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg Original Article PURPOSE: Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) are increasingly being developed for automated fracture detection in orthopaedic trauma surgery. Studies to date, however, are limited to providing classification based on the entire image—and only produce heatmaps for approximate fracture localization instead of delineating exact fracture morphology. Therefore, we aimed to answer (1) what is the performance of a CNN that detects, classifies, localizes, and segments an ankle fracture, and (2) would this be externally valid? METHODS: The training set included 326 isolated fibula fractures and 423 non-fracture radiographs. The Detectron2 implementation of the Mask R-CNN was trained with labelled and annotated radiographs. The internal validation (or ‘test set’) and external validation sets consisted of 300 and 334 radiographs, respectively. Consensus agreement between three experienced fellowship-trained trauma surgeons was defined as the ground truth label. Diagnostic accuracy and area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC) were used to assess classification performance. The Intersection over Union (IoU) was used to quantify accuracy of the segmentation predictions by the CNN, where a value of 0.5 is generally considered an adequate segmentation. RESULTS: The final CNN was able to classify fibula fractures according to four classes (Danis-Weber A, B, C and No Fracture) with AUC values ranging from 0.93 to 0.99. Diagnostic accuracy was 89% on the test set with average sensitivity of 89% and specificity of 96%. External validity was 89–90% accurate on a set of radiographs from a different hospital. Accuracies/AUCs observed were 100/0.99 for the ‘No Fracture’ class, 92/0.99 for ‘Weber B’, 88/0.93 for ‘Weber C’, and 76/0.97 for ‘Weber A’. For the fracture bounding box prediction by the CNN, a mean IoU of 0.65 (SD ± 0.16) was observed. The fracture segmentation predictions by the CNN resulted in a mean IoU of 0.47 (SD ± 0.17). CONCLUSIONS: This study presents a look into the ‘black box’ of CNNs and represents the first automated delineation (segmentation) of fracture lines on (ankle) radiographs. The AUC values presented in this paper indicate good discriminatory capability of the CNN and substantiate further study of CNNs in detecting and classifying ankle fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II, Diagnostic imaging study. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022-11-14 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10175446/ /pubmed/36374292 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-022-02136-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Article Prijs, Jasper Liao, Zhibin To, Minh-Son Verjans, Johan Jutte, Paul C. Stirler, Vincent Olczak, Jakub Gordon, Max Guss, Daniel DiGiovanni, Christopher W. Jaarsma, Ruurd L. IJpma, Frank F. A. Doornberg, Job N. Development and external validation of automated detection, classification, and localization of ankle fractures: inside the black box of a convolutional neural network (CNN) |
title | Development and external validation of automated detection, classification, and localization of ankle fractures: inside the black box of a convolutional neural network (CNN) |
title_full | Development and external validation of automated detection, classification, and localization of ankle fractures: inside the black box of a convolutional neural network (CNN) |
title_fullStr | Development and external validation of automated detection, classification, and localization of ankle fractures: inside the black box of a convolutional neural network (CNN) |
title_full_unstemmed | Development and external validation of automated detection, classification, and localization of ankle fractures: inside the black box of a convolutional neural network (CNN) |
title_short | Development and external validation of automated detection, classification, and localization of ankle fractures: inside the black box of a convolutional neural network (CNN) |
title_sort | development and external validation of automated detection, classification, and localization of ankle fractures: inside the black box of a convolutional neural network (cnn) |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10175446/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36374292 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-022-02136-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT prijsjasper developmentandexternalvalidationofautomateddetectionclassificationandlocalizationofanklefracturesinsidetheblackboxofaconvolutionalneuralnetworkcnn AT liaozhibin developmentandexternalvalidationofautomateddetectionclassificationandlocalizationofanklefracturesinsidetheblackboxofaconvolutionalneuralnetworkcnn AT tominhson developmentandexternalvalidationofautomateddetectionclassificationandlocalizationofanklefracturesinsidetheblackboxofaconvolutionalneuralnetworkcnn AT verjansjohan developmentandexternalvalidationofautomateddetectionclassificationandlocalizationofanklefracturesinsidetheblackboxofaconvolutionalneuralnetworkcnn AT juttepaulc developmentandexternalvalidationofautomateddetectionclassificationandlocalizationofanklefracturesinsidetheblackboxofaconvolutionalneuralnetworkcnn AT stirlervincent developmentandexternalvalidationofautomateddetectionclassificationandlocalizationofanklefracturesinsidetheblackboxofaconvolutionalneuralnetworkcnn AT olczakjakub developmentandexternalvalidationofautomateddetectionclassificationandlocalizationofanklefracturesinsidetheblackboxofaconvolutionalneuralnetworkcnn AT gordonmax developmentandexternalvalidationofautomateddetectionclassificationandlocalizationofanklefracturesinsidetheblackboxofaconvolutionalneuralnetworkcnn AT gussdaniel developmentandexternalvalidationofautomateddetectionclassificationandlocalizationofanklefracturesinsidetheblackboxofaconvolutionalneuralnetworkcnn AT digiovannichristopherw developmentandexternalvalidationofautomateddetectionclassificationandlocalizationofanklefracturesinsidetheblackboxofaconvolutionalneuralnetworkcnn AT jaarsmaruurdl developmentandexternalvalidationofautomateddetectionclassificationandlocalizationofanklefracturesinsidetheblackboxofaconvolutionalneuralnetworkcnn AT ijpmafrankfa developmentandexternalvalidationofautomateddetectionclassificationandlocalizationofanklefracturesinsidetheblackboxofaconvolutionalneuralnetworkcnn AT doornbergjobn developmentandexternalvalidationofautomateddetectionclassificationandlocalizationofanklefracturesinsidetheblackboxofaconvolutionalneuralnetworkcnn AT developmentandexternalvalidationofautomateddetectionclassificationandlocalizationofanklefracturesinsidetheblackboxofaconvolutionalneuralnetworkcnn |