Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36368975›Full record

ArticleBMC medical imaging2022

A deep learning approach for automated diagnosis of pulmonary embolism on computed tomographic pulmonary angiography.

Pranav Ajmera, Amit Kharat, Jitesh Seth, Snehal Rathi, Richa Pant, Manish Gawali, Viraj Kulkarni, Ragamayi Maramraju, Isha Kedia, Rajesh Botchu and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical imaging, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

11 authors.

Pranav AjmeraDr D.Y. Patil Medical College, Hospital and Research Center, Pune, India.
Amit KharatDr D.Y. Patil Medical College, Hospital and Research Center, Pune, India.
Jitesh SethDeepTek Medical Imaging Pvt. Ltd., Pune, India.
Snehal RathiDepartment of Radiology, Mahatma Gandhi Mission Medical College and Hospital, Navi Mumbai, India.
Richa PantDeepTek Medical Imaging Pvt. Ltd., Pune, India. richa.pant@deeptek.ai.
Manish GawaliDeepTek Medical Imaging Pvt. Ltd., Pune, India.
Viraj KulkarniDeepTek Medical Imaging Pvt. Ltd., Pune, India.
Ragamayi MaramrajuDr D.Y. Patil Medical College, Hospital and Research Center, Pune, India.
Isha KediaDr D.Y. Patil Medical College, Hospital and Research Center, Pune, India.
Rajesh BotchuDepartment of Radiology, Royal Orthopedic Hospital, Birmingham, UK.
Sanjay KhaladkarDr D.Y. Patil Medical College, Hospital and Research Center, Pune, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundComputed tomographic pulmonary angiography (CTPA) is the diagnostic standard for confirming pulmonary embolism (PE). Since PE is a life-threatening condition, early diagnosis and treatment are critical to avoid PE-associated morbidity and mortality. However, PE remains subject to misdiagnosis.

methodsWe retrospectively identified 251 CTPAs performed at a tertiary care hospital between January 2018 to January 2021. The scans were classified as positive (n = 55) and negative (n = 196) for PE based on the annotations made by board-certified radiologists. A fully anonymized CT slice served as input for the detection of PE by the 2D segmentation model comprising U-Net architecture with Xception encoder. The diagnostic performance of the model was calculated at both the scan and the slice levels.

resultsThe model correctly identified 44 out of 55 scans as positive for PE and 146 out of 196 scans as negative for PE with a sensitivity of 0.80 [95% CI 0.68, 0.89], a specificity of 0.74 [95% CI 0.68, 0.80], and an accuracy of 0.76 [95% CI 0.70, 0.81]. On slice level, 4817 out of 5183 slices were marked as positive for the presence of emboli with a specificity of 0.89 [95% CI 0.88, 0.89], a sensitivity of 0.93 [95% CI 0.92, 0.94], and an accuracy of 0.89 [95% CI 0.887, 0.890]. The model also achieved an AUROC of 0.85 [0.78, 0.90] and 0.94 [0.936, 0.941] at scan level and slice level, respectively for the detection of PE.

conclusionThe development of an AI model and its use for the identification of pulmonary embolism will support healthcare workers by reducing the rate of missed findings and minimizing the time required to screen the scans.

Indexed as

Deep LearningPulmonary EmbolismAngiographyComputed Tomography AngiographyHumansRetrospective StudiesTomography, X-Ray ComputedArtificial intelligenceComputed tomographic pulmonary angiographyPulmonary embolismU-Net architecture

Identifiers

PMID36368975
PMCPMC9651891

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.