Han Qi, Jing Feihua, Sun Zhiguo, Liu Fei, Zhang Jucai, Wang Jian, Liang Hongqin
Department of Radiology, Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University), Chongqing, China.
Department of Radiology, Linfen Central Hospital, Linfen, China.
Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2023 Jun 1;13(6):3789-3801. doi: 10.21037/qims-22-1115. Epub 2023 Apr 12.
The commercial coronary computed tomographic angiography artificial intelligence (CCTA-AI) platform has made great progress in clinical application. However, research is needed to elucidate the current stage of commercial AI platforms and the role of radiologists. This study compared the diagnostic performance of the commercial CCTA-AI platform with that of a reader based on a multicenter and multidevice sample.
A total of 318 patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) who underwent both CCTA and invasive coronary angiography (ICA) were included in a multicenter and multidevice validation cohort between 2017 and 2021. The commercial CCTA-AI platform was used to automatically assess coronary artery stenosis by using ICA findings as the gold standard. The CCTA reader was completed by radiologists. The diagnostic performance of the commercial CCTA-AI platform and CCTA reader was evaluated at the patient and segment levels. The cutoff values of models 1 and 2 were 50% and 70% stenosis, respectively.
It took 20.4 seconds to accomplish post-processing per patient when using the CCTA-AI platform, which was significantly shorter than the time taken to complete this task with the CCTA reader (1,112.1 s). In the patient-based analysis, the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.85 using the CCTA-AI platform and 0.61 using the CCTA reader in model 1 (stenosis ratio: 50%). In contrast, the AUC was 0.78 using the CCTA-AI platform and 0.64 using the CCTA reader in model 2 (stenosis ratio: 70%). In the segment-based analysis, the AUCs of CCTA-AI were slightly better than those of the readers. The negative predictive value (NPV) increased from model 1 to model 2. Furthermore, the diagnostic performance was better for larger-diameter arteries.
The commercial CCTA-AI platform may provide a feasible solution for the diagnosis of coronary artery stenosis, and it has a diagnostic performance that is slightly better than that of a radiologist with a moderate level of experience (5-10 years of experience).
商用冠状动脉计算机断层扫描血管造影人工智能(CCTA-AI)平台在临床应用方面取得了巨大进展。然而,需要开展研究以阐明商用人工智能平台的当前阶段以及放射科医生的作用。本研究基于多中心和多设备样本,比较了商用CCTA-AI平台与阅片者的诊断性能。
2017年至2021年期间,共有318例疑似冠心病(CAD)患者同时接受了CCTA和有创冠状动脉造影(ICA)检查,并被纳入多中心和多设备验证队列。以ICA检查结果作为金标准,使用商用CCTA-AI平台自动评估冠状动脉狭窄情况。CCTA阅片工作由放射科医生完成。在患者和节段层面评估商用CCTA-AI平台和CCTA阅片者的诊断性能。模型1和模型2的截断值分别为狭窄50%和70%。
使用CCTA-AI平台时,每位患者完成后处理需要20.4秒,这明显短于使用CCTA阅片者完成此任务所需的时间(1112.1秒)。在基于患者的分析中,在模型1(狭窄率:50%)中,使用CCTA-AI平台时曲线下面积(AUC)为0.85,使用CCTA阅片者时为0.61。相比之下,在模型2(狭窄率:70%)中,使用CCTA-AI平台时AUC为0.78,使用CCTA阅片者时为0.64。在基于节段的分析中,CCTA-AI的AUC略优于阅片者。阴性预测值(NPV)从模型1到模型2有所增加。此外,对于较大直径的动脉,诊断性能更好。
商用CCTA-AI平台可能为冠状动脉狭窄的诊断提供一种可行的解决方案,其诊断性能略优于经验中等(5 - 10年经验)的放射科医生。