Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35571991›Full record

ArticleJournal of interventional cardiology2022

Automated MSCT Analysis for Planning Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Using Artificial Intelligence.

Kilian Michiels, Eva Heffinck, Patricio Astudillo, Ivan Wong, Peter Mortier, Alessandra Maria Bavo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of interventional cardiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Clinical Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Structural Heart Disease.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2026
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. 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

6 authors.

Kilian MichielsFEops NV, Gent, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3689-8345
Eva HeffinckFEops NV, Gent, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9199-6138
Patricio AstudilloFEops NV, Gent, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5503-6217
Ivan WongThe Heart Centre, Rigs Hospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1609-9941
Peter MortierFEops NV, Gent, Belgium.
Alessandra Maria BavoFEops NV, Gent, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1085-5008

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The number of multislice computed tomography (MSCT) analyses performed for planning structural heart interventions is rapidly increasing. Further automation is required to save time, increase standardization, and reduce the learning curve. Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate the feasibility of a fully automated artificial intelligence (AI)-based MSCT analysis for planning structural heart interventions, focusing on left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) as the selected use case. Methods: Different deep learning models were trained, validated, and tested using a cohort of 583 patients for which manually annotated data were available. These models were used independently or in combination to detect the anatomical ostium, the landing zone, the mitral valve annulus, and the fossa ovalis and to segment the left atrium (LA) and left atrial appendage (LAA). The accuracy of the models was evaluated through comparison with the manually annotated data. Results: The automated analysis was performed on 25 randomly selected patients of the test cohort. The results were compared to the manually identified landmarks. The predicted segmentation of the LA(A) was similar to the manual segmentation (dice score of 0.94 ± 0.02). The difference between the automatically predicted and manually measured perimeter-based diameter was -0.8 ± 1.3 mm (anatomical ostium), -1.0 ± 1.5 mm (Amulet landing zone), and -0.1 ± 1.3 mm (Watchman FLX landing zone), which is similar to the operator variability on these measurements. Finally, the detected mitral valve annulus and fossa ovalis were close to the manual detection of these landmarks, as shown by the Hausdorff distance (3.9 ± 1.2 mm and 4.8 ± 1.8 mm, respectively). The average runtime of the complete workflow, including data pre- and postprocessing, was 57.5 ± 34.5 seconds. Conclusions: A fast and accurate AI-based workflow is proposed to automatically analyze MSCT images for planning LAAO. The approach, which can be easily extended toward other structural heart interventions, may help to handle the rapidly increasing volumes of patients.

Indexed as

Atrial AppendageAtrial FibrillationArtificial IntelligenceHeart AtriaHumansMitral ValveMultidetector Computed Tomography

Identifiers

PMID35571991
PMCPMC9068333

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.