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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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.
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