Cargando…

How artificial intelligence improves radiological interpretation in suspected pulmonary embolism

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate and compare the diagnostic performances of a commercialized artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm for diagnosing pulmonary embolism (PE) on CT pulmonary angiogram (CTPA) with those of emergency radiologists in routine clinical practice. METHODS: This was an IRB-approved retr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cheikh, Alexandre Ben, Gorincour, Guillaume, Nivet, Hubert, May, Julien, Seux, Mylene, Calame, Paul, Thomson, Vivien, Delabrousse, Eric, Crombé, Amandine
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8938594/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35316363
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-022-08645-2
_version_ 1784672579041099776
author Cheikh, Alexandre Ben
Gorincour, Guillaume
Nivet, Hubert
May, Julien
Seux, Mylene
Calame, Paul
Thomson, Vivien
Delabrousse, Eric
Crombé, Amandine
author_facet Cheikh, Alexandre Ben
Gorincour, Guillaume
Nivet, Hubert
May, Julien
Seux, Mylene
Calame, Paul
Thomson, Vivien
Delabrousse, Eric
Crombé, Amandine
author_sort Cheikh, Alexandre Ben
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To evaluate and compare the diagnostic performances of a commercialized artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm for diagnosing pulmonary embolism (PE) on CT pulmonary angiogram (CTPA) with those of emergency radiologists in routine clinical practice. METHODS: This was an IRB-approved retrospective multicentric study including patients with suspected PE from September to December 2019 (i.e., during a preliminary evaluation period of an approved AI algorithm). CTPA quality and conclusions by emergency radiologists were retrieved from radiological reports. The gold standard was a retrospective review of CTPA, radiological and clinical reports, AI outputs, and patient outcomes. Diagnostic performance metrics for AI and radiologists were assessed in the entire cohort and depending on CTPA quality. RESULTS: Overall, 1202 patients were included (median age: 66.2 years). PE prevalence was 15.8% (190/1202). The AI algorithm detected 219 suspicious PEs, of which 176 were true PEs, including 19 true PEs missed by radiologists. In the cohort, the highest sensitivity and negative predictive values (NPVs) were obtained with AI (92.6% versus 90% and 98.6% versus 98.1%, respectively), while the highest specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) were found with radiologists (99.1% versus 95.8% and 95% versus 80.4%, respectively). Accuracy, specificity, and PPV were significantly higher for radiologists except in subcohorts with poor-to-average injection quality. Radiologists positively evaluated the AI algorithm to improve their diagnostic comfort (55/79 [69.6%]). CONCLUSION: Instead of replacing radiologists, AI for PE detection appears to be a safety net in emergency radiology practice due to high sensitivity and NPV, thereby increasing the self-confidence of radiologists. KEY POINTS: • Both the AI algorithm and emergency radiologists showed excellent performance in diagnosing PE on CTPA (sensitivity and specificity ≥ 90%; accuracy ≥ 95%). • The AI algorithm for PE detection can help increase the sensitivity and NPV of emergency radiologists in clinical practice, especially in cases of poor-to-moderate injection quality. • Emergency radiologists recommended the use of AI for PE detection in satisfaction surveys to increase their confidence and comfort in their final diagnosis. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00330-022-08645-2.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8938594
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89385942022-03-22 How artificial intelligence improves radiological interpretation in suspected pulmonary embolism Cheikh, Alexandre Ben Gorincour, Guillaume Nivet, Hubert May, Julien Seux, Mylene Calame, Paul Thomson, Vivien Delabrousse, Eric Crombé, Amandine Eur Radiol Imaging Informatics and Artificial Intelligence OBJECTIVES: To evaluate and compare the diagnostic performances of a commercialized artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm for diagnosing pulmonary embolism (PE) on CT pulmonary angiogram (CTPA) with those of emergency radiologists in routine clinical practice. METHODS: This was an IRB-approved retrospective multicentric study including patients with suspected PE from September to December 2019 (i.e., during a preliminary evaluation period of an approved AI algorithm). CTPA quality and conclusions by emergency radiologists were retrieved from radiological reports. The gold standard was a retrospective review of CTPA, radiological and clinical reports, AI outputs, and patient outcomes. Diagnostic performance metrics for AI and radiologists were assessed in the entire cohort and depending on CTPA quality. RESULTS: Overall, 1202 patients were included (median age: 66.2 years). PE prevalence was 15.8% (190/1202). The AI algorithm detected 219 suspicious PEs, of which 176 were true PEs, including 19 true PEs missed by radiologists. In the cohort, the highest sensitivity and negative predictive values (NPVs) were obtained with AI (92.6% versus 90% and 98.6% versus 98.1%, respectively), while the highest specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) were found with radiologists (99.1% versus 95.8% and 95% versus 80.4%, respectively). Accuracy, specificity, and PPV were significantly higher for radiologists except in subcohorts with poor-to-average injection quality. Radiologists positively evaluated the AI algorithm to improve their diagnostic comfort (55/79 [69.6%]). CONCLUSION: Instead of replacing radiologists, AI for PE detection appears to be a safety net in emergency radiology practice due to high sensitivity and NPV, thereby increasing the self-confidence of radiologists. KEY POINTS: • Both the AI algorithm and emergency radiologists showed excellent performance in diagnosing PE on CTPA (sensitivity and specificity ≥ 90%; accuracy ≥ 95%). • The AI algorithm for PE detection can help increase the sensitivity and NPV of emergency radiologists in clinical practice, especially in cases of poor-to-moderate injection quality. • Emergency radiologists recommended the use of AI for PE detection in satisfaction surveys to increase their confidence and comfort in their final diagnosis. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00330-022-08645-2. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022-03-22 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC8938594/ /pubmed/35316363 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-022-08645-2 Text en © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to European Society of Radiology 2022 This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.
spellingShingle Imaging Informatics and Artificial Intelligence
Cheikh, Alexandre Ben
Gorincour, Guillaume
Nivet, Hubert
May, Julien
Seux, Mylene
Calame, Paul
Thomson, Vivien
Delabrousse, Eric
Crombé, Amandine
How artificial intelligence improves radiological interpretation in suspected pulmonary embolism
title How artificial intelligence improves radiological interpretation in suspected pulmonary embolism
title_full How artificial intelligence improves radiological interpretation in suspected pulmonary embolism
title_fullStr How artificial intelligence improves radiological interpretation in suspected pulmonary embolism
title_full_unstemmed How artificial intelligence improves radiological interpretation in suspected pulmonary embolism
title_short How artificial intelligence improves radiological interpretation in suspected pulmonary embolism
title_sort how artificial intelligence improves radiological interpretation in suspected pulmonary embolism
topic Imaging Informatics and Artificial Intelligence
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8938594/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35316363
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-022-08645-2
work_keys_str_mv AT cheikhalexandreben howartificialintelligenceimprovesradiologicalinterpretationinsuspectedpulmonaryembolism
AT gorincourguillaume howartificialintelligenceimprovesradiologicalinterpretationinsuspectedpulmonaryembolism
AT nivethubert howartificialintelligenceimprovesradiologicalinterpretationinsuspectedpulmonaryembolism
AT mayjulien howartificialintelligenceimprovesradiologicalinterpretationinsuspectedpulmonaryembolism
AT seuxmylene howartificialintelligenceimprovesradiologicalinterpretationinsuspectedpulmonaryembolism
AT calamepaul howartificialintelligenceimprovesradiologicalinterpretationinsuspectedpulmonaryembolism
AT thomsonvivien howartificialintelligenceimprovesradiologicalinterpretationinsuspectedpulmonaryembolism
AT delabrousseeric howartificialintelligenceimprovesradiologicalinterpretationinsuspectedpulmonaryembolism
AT crombeamandine howartificialintelligenceimprovesradiologicalinterpretationinsuspectedpulmonaryembolism