Dataset Information

Improving detection of impacted animal bones on lateral neck radiograph using a deep learning artificial intelligence algorithm.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

We aimed to develop a deep learning artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm to detect impacted animal bones on lateral neck radiographs and to assess its effectiveness for improving the interpretation of lateral neck radiographs.

Methods

Lateral neck radiographs were retrospectively collected for patients with animal bone impaction between January 2010 and March 2020. Radiographs were then separated into training, validation, and testing sets. A total of 1733 lateral neck radiographs were used to develop the deep learning algorithm. The testing set was assessed for the stand-alone deep learning AI algorithm and for human readers (radiologists, radiology residents, emergency physicians, ENT physicians) with and without the aid of the AI algorithm. Another radiograph cohort, collected from April 1, 2020, to June 30, 2020, was analyzed to simulate clinical application by comparing the deep learning AI algorithm with radiologists' reports.

Results

In the testing set, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the AI model were 96%, 90%, and 93% respectively. Among the human readers, all physicians of different subspecialties achieved a higher accuracy with AI-assisted reading than without. In the simulation set, among the 20 cases positive for animal bones, the AI model accurately identified 3 more cases than the radiologists' reports.

Conclusion

Our deep learning AI model demonstrated a higher sensitivity for detection of animal bone impaction on lateral neck radiographs without an increased false positive rate. The application of this model in a clinical setting may effectively reduce time to diagnosis, accelerate workflow, and decrease the use of CT.

SUBMITTER: Chen YS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10020388 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Improving detection of impacted animal bones on lateral neck radiograph using a deep learning artificial intelligence algorithm.

Chen Yueh-Sheng YS Luo Sheng-Dean SD Lee Chi-Hsun CH Lin Jian-Feng JF Lin Te-Yen TY Ko Sheung-Fat SF Yu Chiun-Chieh CC Chiang Pi-Ling PL Wang Cheng-Kang CK Chiu I-Min IM Huang Yii-Ting YT Tai Yi-Fan YF Chiang Po-Teng PT Lin Wei-Che WC

Insights into imaging 20230316 1

<h4>Objective</h4>We aimed to develop a deep learning artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm to detect impacted animal bones on lateral neck radiographs and to assess its effectiveness for improving the interpretation of lateral neck radiographs.<h4>Methods</h4>Lateral neck radiographs were retrospectively collected for patients with animal bone impaction between January 2010 and March 2020. Radiographs were then separated into training, validation, and testing sets. A total of 1733 lateral neck ...[more]

PMID: 36929090

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceMultimodal generative artificial intelligence (AI) methodologies have the potential to optimize emergency department care by producing draft radiology reports from input images.ObjectiveTo evaluate the accuracy and quality of AI-generated chest radiograph interpretations in the emergency department setting.Design, setting, and participantsThis was a retrospective diagnostic study of 500 randomly sampled emergency department encounters at a tertiary care institution including chest radiographs interpreted by both a teleradiology service and on-site attending radiologist from January 2022 to January 2023. An AI interpretation was generated for each radiograph. The 3 radiograph interpretations were each rated in duplicate by 6 emergency department physicians using a 5-point Likert scale.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was any difference in Likert scores between radiologist, AI, and teleradiology reports, using a cumulative link mixed model. Secondary analyses compared the probability of each report type containing no clinically significant discrepancy with further stratification by finding presence, using a logistic mixed-effects model. Physician comments on discrepancies were recorded.ResultsA total of 500 ED studies were included from 500 unique patients with a mean (SD) age of 53.3 (21.6) years; 282 patients (56.4%) were female. There was a significant association of report type with ratings, with post hoc tests revealing significantly greater scores for AI (mean [SE] score, 3.22 [0.34]; P < .001) and radiologist (mean [SE] score, 3.34 [0.34]; P < .001) reports compared with teleradiology (mean [SE] score, 2.74 [0.34]) reports. AI and radiologist reports were not significantly different. On secondary analysis, there was no difference in the probability of no clinically significant discrepancy between the 3 report types. Further stratification of reports by presence of cardiomegaly, pulmonary edema, pleural effusion, infiltrate, pneumothorax, and support devices also yielded no difference in the probability of containing no clinically significant discrepancy between the report types.Conclusions and relevanceIn a representative sample of emergency department chest radiographs, results suggest that the generative AI model produced reports of similar clinical accuracy and textual quality to radiologist reports while providing higher textual quality than teleradiologist reports. Implementation of the model in the clinical workflow could enable timely alerts to life-threatening pathology while aiding imaging interpretation and documentation.

Project description:ImportanceThe efficient and accurate interpretation of radiologic images is paramount.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether a deep learning-based artificial intelligence (AI) engine used concurrently can improve reader performance and efficiency in interpreting chest radiograph abnormalities.Design, setting, and participantsThis multicenter cohort study was conducted from April to November 2021 and involved radiologists, including attending radiologists, thoracic radiology fellows, and residents, who independently participated in 2 observer performance test sessions. The sessions included a reading session with AI and a session without AI, in a randomized crossover manner with a 4-week washout period in between. The AI produced a heat map and the image-level probability of the presence of the referrable lesion. The data used were collected at 2 quaternary academic hospitals in Boston, Massachusetts: Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (The Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care Chest X-Ray [MIMIC-CXR]) and Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH).Main outcomes and measuresThe ground truths for the labels were created via consensual reading by 2 thoracic radiologists. Each reader documented their findings in a customized report template, in which the 4 target chest radiograph findings and the reader confidence of the presence of each finding was recorded. The time taken for reporting each chest radiograph was also recorded. Sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) were calculated for each target finding.ResultsA total of 6 radiologists (2 attending radiologists, 2 thoracic radiology fellows, and 2 residents) participated in the study. The study involved a total of 497 frontal chest radiographs-247 from the MIMIC-CXR data set (demographic data for patients were not available) and 250 chest radiographs from MGH (mean [SD] age, 63 [16] years; 133 men [53.2%])-from adult patients with and without 4 target findings (pneumonia, nodule, pneumothorax, and pleural effusion). The target findings were found in 351 of 497 chest radiographs. The AI was associated with higher sensitivity for all findings compared with the readers (nodule, 0.816 [95% CI, 0.732-0.882] vs 0.567 [95% CI, 0.524-0.611]; pneumonia, 0.887 [95% CI, 0.834-0.928] vs 0.673 [95% CI, 0.632-0.714]; pleural effusion, 0.872 [95% CI, 0.808-0.921] vs 0.889 [95% CI, 0.862-0.917]; pneumothorax, 0.988 [95% CI, 0.932-1.000] vs 0.792 [95% CI, 0.756-0.827]). AI-aided interpretation was associated with significantly improved reader sensitivities for all target findings, without negative impacts on the specificity. Overall, the AUROCs of readers improved for all 4 target findings, with significant improvements in detection of pneumothorax and nodule. The reporting time with AI was 10% lower than without AI (40.8 vs 36.9 seconds; difference, 3.9 seconds; 95% CI, 2.9-5.2 seconds; P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that AI-aided interpretation was associated with improved reader performance and efficiency for identifying major thoracic findings on a chest radiograph.

Project description:ImportanceEarly breast cancer detection is associated with lower morbidity and mortality.ObjectiveTo examine whether a commercial artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm for breast cancer detection could estimate the development of future cancer.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective cohort study of 116 495 women aged 50 to 69 years with no prior history of breast cancer before they underwent at least 3 consecutive biennial screening examinations used scores from an AI algorithm (INSIGHT MMG, version 1.1.7.2; Lunit Inc; used September 28, 2022, to April 5, 2023) for breast cancer detection and screening data from multiple, consecutive rounds of mammography performed from September 13, 2004, to December 21, 2018, at 9 breast centers in Norway. The statistical analyses were performed from September 2023 to August 2024.ExposureArtificial intelligence algorithm score indicating suspicion for the presence of breast cancer. The algorithm provided a continuous cancer detection score for each examination ranging from 0 to 100, with increasing values indicating a higher likelihood of cancer being present on the current mammogram.Main outcomes and measuresMaximum AI algorithm score for cancer detection and absolute difference in score among breasts of women developing screening-detected cancer, women with interval cancer, and women who screened negative.ResultsThe mean (SD) age at the first study round was 58.5 (4.5) years for 1265 women with screening-detected cancer in the third round, 57.4 (4.6) years for 342 women with interval cancer after 3 negative screening rounds, and 56.4 (4.9) years for 116 495 women without breast cancer all 3 screening rounds. The mean (SD) absolute differences in AI scores among breasts of women developing screening-detected cancer were 21.3 (28.1) at the first study round, 30.7 (32.5) at the second study round, and 79.0 (28.9) at the third study round. The mean (SD) differences prior to interval cancer were 19.7 (27.0) at the first study round, 21.0 (27.7) at the second study round, and 34.0 (33.6) at the third study round. The mean (SD) differences among women who did not develop breast cancer were 9.9 (17.5) at the first study round, 9.6 (17.4) at the second study round, and 9.3 (17.3) at the third study round. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the absolute difference were 0.63 (95% CI, 0.61-0.65) at the first study round, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.71-0.74) at the second study round, and 0.96 (95% CI, 0.95-0.96) at the third study round for screening-detected cancer and 0.64 (95% CI, 0.61-0.67) at the first study round, 0.65 (95% CI, 0.62-0.68) at the second study round, and 0.77 (95% CI, 0.74-0.79) at the third study round for interval cancers.Conclusions and relevanceIn this retrospective cohort study of women undergoing screening mammography, mean absolute AI scores were higher for breasts developing vs not developing cancer 4 to 6 years before their eventual detection. These findings suggest that commercial AI algorithms developed for breast cancer detection may identify women at high risk of a future breast cancer, offering a pathway for personalized screening approaches that can lead to earlier cancer diagnosis.

Project description:BackgroundIn-hospital cardiac arrest is a major burden in health care. Although several track-and-trigger systems are used to predict cardiac arrest, they often have unsatisfactory performances. We hypothesized that a deep-learning-based artificial intelligence algorithm (DLA) could effectively predict cardiac arrest using electrocardiography (ECG). We developed and validated a DLA for predicting cardiac arrest using ECG.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective study that included 47,505 ECGs of 25,672 adult patients admitted to two hospitals, who underwent at least one ECG from October 2016 to September 2019. The endpoint was occurrence of cardiac arrest within 24 h from ECG. Using subgroup analyses in patients who were initially classified as non-event, we confirmed the delayed occurrence of cardiac arrest and unexpected intensive care unit transfer over 14 days.ResultsWe used 32,294 ECGs of 10,461 patients and 4483 ECGs of 4483 patients from a hospital were used as development and internal validation data, respectively. Additionally, 10,728 ECGs of 10,728 patients from another hospital were used as external validation data, which confirmed the robustness of the developed DLA. During internal and external validation, the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves of the DLA in predicting cardiac arrest within 24 h were 0.913 and 0.948, respectively. The high risk group of the DLA showed a significantly higher hazard for delayed cardiac arrest (5.74% vs. 0.33%, P < 0.001) and unexpected intensive care unit transfer (4.23% vs. 0.82%, P < 0.001). A sensitivity map of the DLA displayed the ECG regions used to predict cardiac arrest, with the DLA focused most on the QRS complex.ConclusionsOur DLA successfully predicted cardiac arrest using diverse formats of ECG. The results indicate that cardiac arrest could be screened and predicted not only with a conventional 12-lead ECG, but also with a single-lead ECG using a wearable device that employs our DLA.

Dataset Information

Improving detection of impacted animal bones on lateral neck radiograph using a deep learning artificial intelligence algorithm.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Improving detection of impacted animal bones on lateral neck radiograph using a deep learning artificial intelligence algorithm.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets