Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36437452›Full record

ArticleJournal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance2022

Cardiovascular magnetic resonance images with susceptibility artifacts: artificial intelligence with spatial-attention for ventricular volumes and mass assessment.

Marco Penso, Mario Babbaro, Sara Moccia, Marco Guglielmo, Maria Ludovica Carerj, Carlo Maria Giacari, Mattia Chiesa, Riccardo Maragna, Mark G Rabbat, Andrea Barison and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

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

  1. SCMR expert consensus statement for cardiovascular magnetic resonance of patients with a cardiac implantable electronic device.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2024
    Guideline
  2. 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

14 authors.

Marco PensoCardiovascular Imaging Department, Centro Cardiologico Monzino IRCCS, Via C. Parea 4, 20138, Milan, Italy. marco.penso@cardiologicomonzino.it.ORCID 0000-0003-4040-6112
Mario BabbaroCardiovascular Imaging Department, Centro Cardiologico Monzino IRCCS, Via C. Parea 4, 20138, Milan, Italy.
Sara MocciaThe BioRobotics Institute and Department of Excellence in Robotics and AI, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pisa, Italy.
Marco GuglielmoCardiovascular Imaging Department, Centro Cardiologico Monzino IRCCS, Via C. Parea 4, 20138, Milan, Italy.
Maria Ludovica CarerjCardiovascular Imaging Department, Centro Cardiologico Monzino IRCCS, Via C. Parea 4, 20138, Milan, Italy.
Carlo Maria GiacariCardiovascular Imaging Department, Centro Cardiologico Monzino IRCCS, Via C. Parea 4, 20138, Milan, Italy.
Mattia ChiesaCardiovascular Imaging Department, Centro Cardiologico Monzino IRCCS, Via C. Parea 4, 20138, Milan, Italy.
Riccardo MaragnaCardiovascular Imaging Department, Centro Cardiologico Monzino IRCCS, Via C. Parea 4, 20138, Milan, Italy.
Mark G RabbatLoyola University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Andrea BarisonFondazione Toscana Gabriele Monasterio, Pisa, Italy.
Nicola MartiniFondazione Toscana Gabriele Monasterio, Pisa, Italy.
Mauro PepiCardiovascular Imaging Department, Centro Cardiologico Monzino IRCCS, Via C. Parea 4, 20138, Milan, Italy.
Enrico G Caiani *Department of Electronics, Information and Biomedical Engineering, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Gianluca Pontone *Cardiovascular Imaging Department, Centro Cardiologico Monzino IRCCS, Via C. Parea 4, 20138, Milan, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSegmentation of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) images is an essential step for evaluating dimensional and functional ventricular parameters as ejection fraction (EF) but may be limited by artifacts, which represent the major challenge to automatically derive clinical information. The aim of this study is to investigate the accuracy of a deep learning (DL) approach for automatic segmentation of cardiac structures from CMR images characterized by magnetic susceptibility artifact in patient with cardiac implanted electronic devices (CIED).

methodsIn this retrospective study, 230 patients (100 with CIED) who underwent clinically indicated CMR were used to developed and test a DL model. A novel convolutional neural network was proposed to extract the left ventricle (LV) and right (RV) ventricle endocardium and LV epicardium. In order to perform a successful segmentation, it is important the network learns to identify salient image regions even during local magnetic field inhomogeneities. The proposed network takes advantage from a spatial attention module to selectively process the most relevant information and focus on the structures of interest. To improve segmentation, especially for images with artifacts, multiple loss functions were minimized in unison. Segmentation results were assessed against manual tracings and commercial CMR analysis software cvi

resultsIn the internal datasets, on image with artifacts, the median Dice coefficients for end-diastolic LV cavity, LV myocardium and RV cavity, were 0.93, 0.77 and 0.87 and 0.91, 0.82, and 0.83 in end-systole, respectively. The proposed method reached higher segmentation accuracy than commercial software, with performance comparable to expert inter-observer variability (bias ± 95%LoA): LVEF 1 ± 8% vs 3 ± 9%, RVEF - 2 ± 15% vs 3 ± 21%. In the external cohort, EF well correlated with manual tracing (intraclass correlation coefficient: LVEF 0.98, RVEF 0.93). The automatic approach was significant faster than manual segmentation in providing cardiac parameters (approximately 1.5 s vs 450 s).

conclusionsExperimental results show that the proposed method reached promising performance in cardiac segmentation from CMR images with susceptibility artifacts and alleviates time consuming expert physician contour segmentation.

Indexed as

ArtifactsArtificial IntelligenceAttentionHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingPredictive Value of TestsRetrospective StudiesCardiac magnetic resonanceCardiac segmentationCardioverter-defibrillatorsDeep learningPacemakerSusceptibility artifacts

Identifiers

PMID36437452
PMCPMC9703740

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.