ArticleInfection and drug resistance2023
Accurate Differentiation of Spinal Tuberculosis and Spinal Metastases Using MR-Based Deep Learning Algorithms.
Article in Infection and drug resistance, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Accuracy of artificial intelligence in detecting tumor bone metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC cancer · 2025Pooled it
- Current update on surgical management for spinal tuberculosis: a scientific mapping of worldwide publications.Frontiers in surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Clinical applications of MRI-based artificial intelligence in spinal metastases: A systematic review.Journal of bone oncology · 2026Review
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of AI in lung cancer metastasis imaging for diagnosis and prognosis.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Computer-aided detection of equivocal spinal tuberculosis on X-ray using a YOLOv11-based deep learning model.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Deep learning segmentation with uncertainty quantification for spinal tuberculosis on fat-suppressed T2-weighted MRI.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Article
- Heterogeneity in longitudinal medication adherence patterns among patients with spinal tuberculosis: a latent class analysis using multi-timepoint follow-up data and associations with clinical outcomes.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Progress in diagnosis and treatment of primary spondylodiscitis: a systematic literature review.EFORT open reviews · 2025Article
- Applications and Performance of Artificial Intelligence in Spinal Metastasis Imaging: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Deep Learning-Based Differentiation of Vertebral Body Lesions on Magnetic Resonance Imaging.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Artificial Intelligence in bone Metastases: A systematic review in guideline adherence of 92 studies.Journal of bone oncology · 2025Review
- Deep Learning for Discrimination of Early Spinal Tuberculosis from Acute Osteoporotic Vertebral Fracture on CT.Infection and drug resistance · 2025Article
- Prediction model for spinal cord injury in spinal tuberculosis patients using multiple machine learning algorithms: a multicentric study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To explore the application of deep learning (DL) methods based on T2 sagittal MR images for discriminating between spinal tuberculosis (STB) and spinal metastases (SM). Patients and Methods: A total of 121 patients with histologically confirmed STB and SM across four institutions were retrospectively analyzed. Data from two institutions were used for developing deep learning models and internal validation, while the remaining institutions' data were used for external testing. Utilizing MVITV2, EfficientNet-B3, ResNet101, and ResNet34 as backbone networks, we developed four distinct DL models and evaluated their diagnostic performance based on metrics such as accuracy (ACC), area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), F1 score, and confusion matrix. Furthermore, the external test images were blindly evaluated by two spine surgeons with different levels of experience. We also used Gradient-Class Activation Maps to visualize the high-dimensional features of different DL models. Results: For the internal validation set, MVITV2 outperformed other models with an accuracy of 98.7%, F1 score of 98.6%, and AUC of 0.98. Other models followed in this order: EfficientNet-B3 (ACC: 96.1%, F1 score: 95.9%, AUC: 0.99), ResNet101 (ACC: 85.5%, F1 score: 84.8%, AUC: 0.90), and ResNet34 (ACC: 81.6%, F1 score: 80.7%, AUC: 0.85). For the external test set, MVITV2 again performed excellently with an accuracy of 91.9%, F1 score of 91.5%, and an AUC of 0.95. EfficientNet-B3 came second (ACC: 85.9, F1 score: 91.5%, AUC: 0.91), followed by ResNet101 (ACC:80.8, F1 score: 80.0%, AUC: 0.87) and ResNet34 (ACC: 78.8, F1 score: 77.9%, AUC: 0.86). Additionally, the diagnostic accuracy of the less experienced spine surgeon was 73.7%, while that of the more experienced surgeon was 88.9%. Conclusion: Deep learning based on T2WI sagittal images can help discriminate between STB and SM, and can achieve a level of diagnostic performance comparable with that produced by experienced spine surgeons.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.