Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30422987›Full record

ArticlePLoS medicine2018

Machine learning assessment of myocardial ischemia using angiography: Development and retrospective validation.

Hyeonyong Hae, Soo-Jin Kang, Won-Jang Kim, So-Yeon Choi, June-Goo Lee, Youngoh Bae, Hyungjoo Cho, Dong Hyun Yang, Joon-Won Kang, Tae-Hwan Lim and 10 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Patient-specificFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Machine Learning in Medicine: Review and Applicability.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2022
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors.

Hyeonyong HaeDepartment of Cardiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-5802-8119
Soo-Jin KangDepartment of Cardiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-3719-4702
Won-Jang KimDepartment of Cardiology, CHA Bundang Medical Center, CHA University, Seongnam, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-9915-3722
So-Yeon ChoiDepartment of Cardiology, Ajou University, Suwon, Korea.
June-Goo LeeBiomedical Engineering Research Center, Asan Institute for Life Sciences, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-1380-6682
Youngoh BaeDepartment of Cardiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.
Hyungjoo ChoDepartment of Cardiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.
Dong Hyun YangDepartment of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-5477-558X
Joon-Won KangDepartment of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.
Tae-Hwan LimDepartment of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.
Cheol Hyun LeeDepartment of Cardiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-4203-1457
Do-Yoon KangDepartment of Cardiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.
Pil Hyung LeeDepartment of Cardiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.
Jung-Min AhnDepartment of Cardiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.
Duk-Woo ParkDepartment of Cardiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.
Seung-Whan LeeDepartment of Cardiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-2662-5952
Young-Hak KimDepartment of Cardiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.
Cheol Whan LeeDepartment of Cardiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.
Seong-Wook ParkDepartment of Cardiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.
Seung-Jung ParkDepartment of Cardiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Machine LearningAgedCardiac CatheterizationClinical Decision-MakingCoronary AngiographyCoronary StenosisCoronary VesselsDiagnosis, Computer-AssistedFemaleFractional Flow Reserve, MyocardialHumansMaleMiddle AgedMyocardial IschemiaPredictive Value of TestsPrognosis

Identifiers

PMID30422987
PMCPMC6233920

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.