ArticlePLoS medicine2018
Machine learning assessment of myocardial ischemia using angiography: Development and retrospective validation.
Article in PLoS medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence in estimating fractional flow reserve: a systematic literature review of techniques.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2023Pooled it
- Utility of artificial intelligence in predicting clinical outcomes of angiographic procedures: a comprehensive scoping review.Journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2026Review
- Are Artificial Intelligence and Robot Nurses a Threat to Student Nurses?: A Quasi-Experimental Study.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2026Article
- An Innovative Model for Diagnosing Lesions in Coronary Angiography Imagery Using an Improved YOLOv4 Model.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Enhancing quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) with advanced artificial intelligence: comparison with manual QCA and visual estimation.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2025Article
- Review
- What characteristics of clinical decision support system implementations lead to adoption for regular use? A scoping review.BMJ health & care informatics · 2024Article
- Non-invasive fractional flow reserve estimation using deep learning on intermediate left anterior descending coronary artery lesion angiography images.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Patient-specificFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- Can artificial intelligence and robotic nurses replace operating room nurses? The quasi-experimental research.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Article
- Artificial intelligence in cardiovascular diseases: diagnostic and therapeutic perspectives.European journal of medical research · 2023Review
- Artificial intelligence in cardiovascular medicine: An updated review of the literature.Journal of cardiovascular and thoracic research · 2023Review
- Deep learning applications in coronary anatomy imaging: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of medical artificial intelligence · 2022Article
- Machine Learning Can Predict the Probability of Biologic Therapy in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Metabolomics and random forests in patients with complex congenital heart disease.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Machine Learning in Medicine: Review and Applicability.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2022Review
- Non-Invasive Quantification of Fraction Flow Reserve Based on Steady-State Geometric Multiscale Models.Frontiers in physiology · 2022Article
- A Cardiovascular Disease Prediction Model Based on Routine Physical Examination Indicators Using Machine Learning Methods: A Cohort Study.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Development and validation pathways of artificial intelligence tools evaluated in randomised clinical trials.BMJ health & care informatics · 2021Article
- Application of machine learning to predict the occurrence of arrhythmia after acute myocardial infarction.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInvasive fractional flow reserve (FFR) is a standard tool for identifying ischemia-producing coronary stenosis. However, in clinical practice, over 70% of treatment decisions still rely on visual estimation of angiographic stenosis, which has limited accuracy (about 60%-65%) for the prediction of FFR < 0.80. One of the reasons for the visual-functional mismatch is that myocardial ischemia can be affected by the supplied myocardial size, which is not always evident by coronary angiography. The aims of this study were to develop an angiography-based machine learning (ML) algorithm for predicting the supplied myocardial volume for a stenosis, as measured using coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), and then to build an angiography-based classifier for the lesions with an FFR < 0.80 versus ≥ 0.80. METHODS AND
findingsA retrospective study was conducted using data from 1,132 stable and unstable angina patients with 1,132 intermediate lesions who underwent invasive coronary angiography, FFR, and CCTA at the Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea, between 1 May 2012 and 30 November 2015. The mean age was 63 ± 10 years, 76% were men, and 72% of the patients presented with stable angina. Of these, 932 patients (assessed before 31 January 2015) constituted the training set for the algorithm, and 200 patients (assessed after 1 February 2015) served as a test cohort to validate its diagnostic performance. Additionally, external validation with 79 patients from two centers (CHA University, Seongnam, Korea, and Ajou University, Suwon, Korea) was conducted. After automatic contour calibration using the caliber of guiding catheter, quantitative coronary angiography was performed using the edge-detection algorithms (CAAS-5, Pie-Medical). Clinical information was provided by the Asan BiomedicaL Research Environment (ABLE) system. The CCTA-based myocardial segmentation (CAMS)-derived myocardial volume supplied by each vessel (right coronary artery [RCA], left anterior descending [LAD], left circumflex [LCX]) and the myocardial volume subtended to a stenotic segment (CAMS-%Vsub) were measured for labeling. The ML for (1) predicting vessel territories (CAMS-%LAD, CAMS-%LCX, and CAMS-%RCA) and CAMS-%Vsub and (2) identifying the lesions with an FFR < 0.80 was constructed. Angiography-based ML, employing a light gradient boosting machine (GBM), showed mean absolute errors (MAEs) of 5.42%, 8.57%, and 4.54% for predicting CAMS-%LAD, CAMS-%LCX, and CAMS-%RCA, respectively. The percent myocardial volumes predicted by ML were used to predict the CAMS-%Vsub. With 5-fold cross validation, the MAEs between ML-predicted percent myocardial volume subtended to a stenotic segment (ML-%Vsub) and CAMS-%Vsub were minimized by the elastic net (6.26% ± 0.55% for LAD, 5.79% ± 0.68% for LCX, and 2.95% ± 0.14% for RCA lesions). Using all attributes (age, sex, involved vessel segment, and angiographic features affecting the myocardial territory and stenosis degree), the ML classifiers (L2 penalized logistic regression, support vector machine, and random forest) predicted an FFR < 0.80 with an accuracy of approximately 80% (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.84-0.87, 95% confidence intervals 0.71-0.94) in the test set, which was greater than that of diameter stenosis (DS) > 53% (66%, AUC = 0.71, 95% confidence intervals 0.65-0.78). The external validation showed 84% accuracy (AUC = 0.89, 95% confidence intervals 0.83-0.95). The retrospective design, single ethnicity, and the lack of clinical outcomes may limit this prediction model's generalized application.
conclusionWe found that angiography-based ML is useful to predict subtended myocardial territories and ischemia-producing lesions by mitigating the visual-functional mismatch between angiographic and FFR. Assessment of clinical utility requires further validation in a large, prospective cohort study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.