A pilot study of deep learning-based CT volumetry for traumatic hemothorax.

purposeWe employ nnU-Net, a state-of-the-art self-configuring deep learning-based semantic segmentation method for quantitative visualization of hemothorax (HTX) in trauma patients, and assess performance using a combination of overlap and volume-based metrics. The accuracy of hemothorax volumes for predicting a composite of hemorrhage-related outcomes - massive transfusion (MT) and in-hospital mortality (IHM) not related to traumatic brain injury - is assessed and compared to subjective expert consensus grading by an experienced chest and emergency radiologist. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe study included manually labeled admission chest CTs from 77 consecutive adult patients with non-negligible (≥ 50 mL) traumatic HTX between 2016 and 2018 from one trauma center. DL results of ensembled nnU-Net were determined from fivefold cross-validation and compared to individual 2D, 3D, and cascaded 3D nnU-Net results using the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and volume similarity index. Pearson's r, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and mean bias were also determined for the best performing model. Manual and automated hemothorax volumes and subjective hemothorax volume grades were analyzed as predictors of MT and IHM using AUC comparison. Volume cut-offs yielding sensitivity or specificity ≥ 90% were determined from ROC analysis.

resultsEnsembled nnU-Net achieved a mean DSC of 0.75 (SD: ± 0.12), and mean volume similarity of 0.91 (SD: ± 0.10), Pearson r of 0.93, and ICC of 0.92. Mean overmeasurement bias was only 1.7 mL despite a range of manual HTX volumes from 35 to 1503 mL (median: 178 mL). AUC of automated volumes for the composite outcome was 0.74 (95%CI: 0.58-0.91), compared to 0.76 (95%CI: 0.58-0.93) for manual volumes, and 0.76 (95%CI: 0.62-0.90) for consensus expert grading (p = 0.93). Automated volume cut-offs of 77 mL and 334 mL predicted the outcome with 93% sensitivity and 90% specificity respectively.

conclusionAutomated HTX volumetry had high method validity, yielded interpretable visual results, and had similar performance for the hemorrhage-related outcomes assessed compared to manual volumes and expert consensus grading. The results suggest promising avenues for automated HTX volumetry in research and clinical care.