Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33479859›Full record

ArticleJournal of digital imaging2021

An Automated Deep Learning Method for Tile AO/OTA Pelvic Fracture Severity Grading from Trauma whole-Body CT.

David Dreizin, Florian Goldmann, Christina LeBedis, Alexis Boscak, Matthew Dattwyler, Uttam Bodanapally, Guang Li, Stephan Anderson, Andreas Maier, Mathias Unberath

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of digital imaging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Observational
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Artificial intelligence fracture recognition on computed tomography: review of literature and recommendations.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2023
    Review
  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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

David DreizinEmergency and Trauma Imaging, Department of Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, R Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. daviddreizin@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-0176-0912
Florian GoldmannFriedrich-Alexander University, Schloßplatz, Erlangen, Germany.
Christina LeBedisDepartment of Radiology, Boston Medical Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Alexis BoscakEmergency and Trauma Imaging, Department of Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, R Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Matthew DattwylerEmergency and Trauma Imaging, Department of Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, R Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Uttam BodanapallyEmergency and Trauma Imaging, Department of Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, R Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Guang LiDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Stephan AndersonDepartment of Radiology, Boston Medical Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Andreas MaierFriedrich-Alexander University, Schloßplatz, Erlangen, Germany.
Mathias UnberathDepartment of Computer Science, Malone Center for Engineering in Healthcare, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
University of Maryland, Baltimore · USBoston University · USFriedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg · DEJohns Hopkins University · US

Funding

Machine learning-based segmentation and risk modeling for real-time prediction of major arterial bleeding after pelvic fracturesK08EB027141 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE · PI DREIZIN, DAVID · 2019 to 2022
$745k
NIBIB NIH HHS K08 EB027141
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Admission trauma whole-body CT is routinely employed as a first-line diagnostic tool for characterizing pelvic fracture severity. Tile AO/OTA grade based on the presence or absence of rotational and translational instability corresponds with need for interventions including massive transfusion and angioembolization. An automated method could be highly beneficial for point of care triage in this critical time-sensitive setting. A dataset of 373 trauma whole-body CTs collected from two busy level 1 trauma centers with consensus Tile AO/OTA grading by three trauma radiologists was used to train and test a triplanar parallel concatenated network incorporating orthogonal full-thickness multiplanar reformat (MPR) views as input with a ResNeXt-50 backbone. Input pelvic images were first derived using an automated registration and cropping technique. Performance of the network for classification of rotational and translational instability was compared with that of (1) an analogous triplanar architecture incorporating an LSTM RNN network, (2) a previously described 3D autoencoder-based method, and (3) grading by a fourth independent blinded radiologist with trauma expertise. Confusion matrix results were derived, anchored to peak Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC). Associations with clinical outcomes were determined using Fisher's exact test. The triplanar parallel concatenated method had the highest accuracies for discriminating translational and rotational instability (85% and 74%, respectively), with specificity, recall, and F1 score of 93.4%, 56.5%, and 0.63 for translational instability and 71.7%, 75.7%, and 0.77 for rotational instability. Accuracy of this method was equivalent to the single radiologist read for rotational instability (74.0% versus 76.7%, p = 0.40), but significantly higher for translational instability (85.0% versus 75.1, p = 0.0007). Mean inference time was < 0.1 s per test image. Translational instability determined with this method was associated with need for angioembolization and massive transfusion (p = 0.002-0.008). Saliency maps demonstrated that the network focused on the sacroiliac complex and pubic symphysis, in keeping with the AO/OTA grading paradigm. A multiview concatenated deep network leveraging 3D information from orthogonal thick-MPR images predicted rotationally and translationally unstable pelvic fractures with accuracy comparable to an independent reader with trauma radiology expertise. Model output demonstrated significant association with key clinical outcomes.

Indexed as

Deep LearningFractures, BonePelvic BonesHumansPelvisTomography, X-Ray ComputedConvolutional neural networkDeep learningPelvic fracturePelvic instabilityPelvic ring disruptionTile classification

Identifiers

PMID33479859
PMCPMC7886919
OpenAlexW3122280840

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.