Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, South Korea.
Department of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Sci Rep. 2022 Apr 1;12(1):5532. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-09550-w.
Blood and fluid analysis is extensively used for classifying the etiology of pleural effusion. However, most studies focused on determining the presence of a disease. This study classified pleural effusion etiology employing deep learning models by applying contrastive-loss. Patients with pleural effusion who underwent thoracentesis between 2009 and 2019 at the Asan Medical Center were analyzed. Five different models for categorizing the etiology of pleural effusion were compared. The performance metrics were top-1 accuracy, top-2 accuracy, and micro-and weighted-AUROC. UMAP and t-SNE were used to visualize the contrastive-loss model's embedding space. Although the 5 models displayed similar performance in the validation set, the contrastive-loss model showed the highest accuracy in the extra-validation set. Additionally, the accuracy and micro-AUROC of the contrastive-loss model were 81.7% and 0.942 in the validation set, and 66.2% and 0.867 in the extra-validation set. Furthermore, the embedding space visualization in the contrastive-loss model exhibited typical and atypical effusion results by comparing the true and false positives of the rule-based criteria. Therefore, classifying the etiology of pleural effusion was achievable using the contrastive-loss model. Conclusively, visualization of the contrastive-loss model will provide clinicians with valuable insights for etiology diagnosis by differentiating between typical and atypical disease types.
血液和体液分析广泛用于分类胸腔积液的病因。然而,大多数研究都集中在确定疾病的存在。本研究通过应用对比损失来使用深度学习模型对胸腔积液病因进行分类。分析了 2009 年至 2019 年期间在 Asan 医疗中心接受胸腔穿刺术的胸腔积液患者。比较了五种不同的胸腔积液病因分类模型。性能指标包括 top-1 准确率、top-2 准确率、微调和加权-AUROC。UMAP 和 t-SNE 用于可视化对比损失模型的嵌入空间。虽然 5 种模型在验证集中表现出相似的性能,但对比损失模型在额外验证集中表现出最高的准确率。此外,对比损失模型在验证集中的准确率和微 AUROC 分别为 81.7%和 0.942,在额外验证集中分别为 66.2%和 0.867。此外,通过比较基于规则的标准的真阳性和假阳性,对比损失模型的嵌入空间可视化展示了典型和非典型积液结果。因此,使用对比损失模型可以实现胸腔积液病因的分类。总之,对比损失模型的可视化将通过区分典型和非典型疾病类型,为临床医生提供病因诊断的有价值的见解。