Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32168039›Full record

ArticleInvestigative radiology2020

Deep Convolutional Neural Network-Based Diagnosis of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Tears: Performance Comparison of Homogenous Versus Heterogeneous Knee MRI Cohorts With Different Pulse Sequence Protocols and 1.5-T and 3-T Magnetic Field Strengths.

Christoph Germann, Giuseppe Marbach, Francesco Civardi, Sandro F Fucentese, Jan Fritz, Reto Sutter, Christian W A Pfirrmann, Benjamin Fritz

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Investigative radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
7.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Christoph GermannDepartment of Radiology, Balgrist University Hospital
Giuseppe MarbachBalzano Informatik AG
Francesco CivardiBalzano Informatik AG
Sandro F FucenteseFaculty of Medicine, University of Zurich
Jan FritzRussell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
Reto SutterDepartment of Radiology, Balgrist University Hospital
Christian W A PfirrmannDepartment of Radiology, Balgrist University Hospital
Benjamin FritzDepartment of Radiology, Balgrist University Hospital
University of Zurich · CHSiemens Healthcare (United States) · USUniversitätsklinik Balgrist · CHMicrosoft (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim of this study was to clinically validate a Deep Convolutional Neural Network (DCNN) for the detection of surgically proven anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears in a large patient cohort and to analyze the effect of magnetic resonance examinations from different institutions, varying protocols, and field strengths. MATERIALS AND

methodsAfter ethics committee approval, this retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was performed on 512 consecutive subjects, who underwent knee magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in a total of 59 different institutions followed by arthroscopic knee surgery at our institution. The DCNN and 3 fellowship-trained full-time academic musculoskeletal radiologists evaluated the MRI examinations for full-thickness ACL tears independently. Surgical reports served as the reference standard. Statistics included diagnostic performance metrics, including sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver operating curve ("AUC ROC"), and kappa statistics. P values less than 0.05 were considered to represent statistical significance.

resultsAnterior cruciate ligament tears were present in 45.7% (234/512) and absent in 54.3% (278/512) of the subjects. The DCNN had a sensitivity of 96.1%, which was not significantly different from the readers (97.5%-97.9%; all P ≥ 0.118), but significantly lower specificity of 93.1% (readers, 99.6%-100%; all P < 0.001) and "AUC ROC" of 0.935 (readers, 0.989-0.991; all P < 0.001) for the entire cohort. Subgroup analysis showed a significantly lower sensitivity, specificity, and "AUC ROC" of the DCNN for outside MRI (92.5%, 87.1%, and 0.898, respectively) than in-house MRI (99.0%, 94.4%, and 0.967, respectively) examinations (P = 0.026, P = 0.043, and P < 0.05, respectively). There were no significant differences in DCNN performance for 1.5-T and 3-T MRI examinations (all P ≥ 0.753, respectively).

conclusionsDeep Convolutional Neural Network performance of ACL tear diagnosis can approach performance levels similar to fellowship-trained full-time academic musculoskeletal radiologists at 1.5 T and 3 T; however, the performance may decrease with increasing MRI examination heterogeneity.

Indexed as

Deep LearningImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMagnetic FieldsMagnetic Resonance ImagingAdultAnterior Cruciate Ligament InjuriesArthroscopyCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID32168039
PMCPMC7343178
OpenAlexW3011285237

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.