Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33823858›Full record

ArticleBiomedical engineering online2021

Predicting plaque vulnerability change using intravascular ultrasound + optical coherence tomography image-based fluid-structure interaction models and machine learning methods with patient follow-up data: a feasibility study.

Xiaoya Guo, Akiko Maehara, Mitsuaki Matsumura, Liang Wang, Jie Zheng, Habib Samady, Gary S Mintz, Don P Giddens, Dalin Tang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biomedical engineering online, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. 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

9 authors.

Xiaoya GuoSchool of Science, Nanjing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Nanjing, 210023, China. guoxiaoya1990@163.com.
Akiko MaeharaThe Cardiovascular Research Foundation, Columbia University, New York, NY, 10022, USA.
Mitsuaki MatsumuraThe Cardiovascular Research Foundation, Columbia University, New York, NY, 10022, USA.
Liang WangSchool of Biological Science and Medical Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing, 210096, China.
Jie ZhengMallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, 63110, USA.
Habib SamadyDepartment of Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, 30307, USA.
Gary S MintzThe Cardiovascular Research Foundation, Columbia University, New York, NY, 10022, USA.
Don P GiddensDepartment of Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, 30307, USA.
Dalin TangDepartment of Mathematics, Southeast University, Nanjing, 210096, China. dtang@wpi.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6965-6417

Funding

Jiangsu Province Science and Technology Agency BE2016785National Sciences Foundation of China 11672001National Sciences Foundation of China 11972117NUPTSF NY219163
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCoronary plaque vulnerability prediction is difficult because plaque vulnerability is non-trivial to quantify, clinically available medical image modality is not enough to quantify thin cap thickness, prediction methods with high accuracies still need to be developed, and gold-standard data to validate vulnerability prediction are often not available. Patient follow-up intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), optical coherence tomography (OCT) and angiography data were acquired to construct 3D fluid-structure interaction (FSI) coronary models and four machine-learning methods were compared to identify optimal method to predict future plaque vulnerability.

methodsBaseline and 10-month follow-up in vivo IVUS and OCT coronary plaque data were acquired from two arteries of one patient using IRB approved protocols with informed consent obtained. IVUS and OCT-based FSI models were constructed to obtain plaque wall stress/strain and wall shear stress. Forty-five slices were selected as machine learning sample database for vulnerability prediction study. Thirteen key morphological factors from IVUS and OCT images and biomechanical factors from FSI model were extracted from 45 slices at baseline for analysis. Lipid percentage index (LPI), cap thickness index (CTI) and morphological plaque vulnerability index (MPVI) were quantified to measure plaque vulnerability. Four machine learning methods (least square support vector machine, discriminant analysis, random forest and ensemble learning) were employed to predict the changes of three indices using all combinations of 13 factors. A standard fivefold cross-validation procedure was used to evaluate prediction results.

resultsFor LPI change prediction using support vector machine, wall thickness was the optimal single-factor predictor with area under curve (AUC) 0.883 and the AUC of optimal combinational-factor predictor achieved 0.963. For CTI change prediction using discriminant analysis, minimum cap thickness was the optimal single-factor predictor with AUC 0.818 while optimal combinational-factor predictor achieved an AUC 0.836. Using random forest for predicting MPVI change, minimum cap thickness was the optimal single-factor predictor with AUC 0.785 and the AUC of optimal combinational-factor predictor achieved 0.847.

conclusionThis feasibility study demonstrated that machine learning methods could be used to accurately predict plaque vulnerability change based on morphological and biomechanical factors from multi-modality image-based FSI models. Large-scale studies are needed to verify our findings.

Indexed as

Feasibility StudiesMachine LearningPlaque, AtheroscleroticTomography, Optical CoherenceUltrasonography, InterventionalCoronary Artery DiseaseFollow-Up StudiesHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedFSIIVUSMorphological indexOCTPatient-specific modelVulnerable plaque

Identifiers

PMID33823858
PMCPMC8025351

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.