Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38317865›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2024

Advancements in cardiac structures segmentation: a comprehensive systematic review of deep learning in CT imaging.

Turki Nasser Alnasser, Lojain Abdulaal, Ahmed Maiter, Michael Sharkey, Krit Dwivedi, Mahan Salehi, Pankaj Garg, Andrew James Swift, Samer Alabed

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

9 authors.

Turki Nasser AlnasserDepartment of Infection, Immunity and Cardiovascular Disease, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
Lojain AbdulaalDepartment of Infection, Immunity and Cardiovascular Disease, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
Ahmed MaiterDepartment of Infection, Immunity and Cardiovascular Disease, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
Michael SharkeyDepartment of Infection, Immunity and Cardiovascular Disease, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
Krit DwivediDepartment of Infection, Immunity and Cardiovascular Disease, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
Mahan SalehiDepartment of Infection, Immunity and Cardiovascular Disease, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
Pankaj GargNorwich Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom.
Andrew James SwiftDepartment of Infection, Immunity and Cardiovascular Disease, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
Samer AlabedDepartment of Infection, Immunity and Cardiovascular Disease, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Segmentation of cardiac structures is an important step in evaluation of the heart on imaging. There has been growing interest in how artificial intelligence (AI) methods-particularly deep learning (DL)-can be used to automate this process. Existing AI approaches to cardiac segmentation have mostly focused on cardiac MRI. This systematic review aimed to appraise the performance and quality of supervised DL tools for the segmentation of cardiac structures on CT. Methods: Embase and Medline databases were searched to identify related studies from January 1, 2013 to December 4, 2023. Original research studies published in peer-reviewed journals after January 1, 2013 were eligible for inclusion if they presented supervised DL-based tools for the segmentation of cardiac structures and non-coronary great vessels on CT. The data extracted from eligible studies included information about cardiac structure(s) being segmented, study location, DL architectures and reported performance metrics such as the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC). The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Checklist for Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging (CLAIM). Results: 18 studies published after 2020 were included. The DSC scores median achieved for the most commonly segmented structures were left atrium (0.88, IQR 0.83-0.91), left ventricle (0.91, IQR 0.89-0.94), left ventricle myocardium (0.83, IQR 0.82-0.92), right atrium (0.88, IQR 0.83-0.90), right ventricle (0.91, IQR 0.85-0.92), and pulmonary artery (0.92, IQR 0.87-0.93). Compliance of studies with CLAIM was variable. In particular, only 58% of studies showed compliance with dataset description criteria and most of the studies did not test or validate their models on external data (81%). Conclusion: Supervised DL has been applied to the segmentation of various cardiac structures on CT. Most showed similar performance as measured by DSC values. Existing studies have been limited by the size and nature of the training datasets, inconsistent descriptions of ground truth annotations and lack of testing in external data or clinical settings. Systematic Review Registration: [www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/], PROSPERO [CRD42023431113].

Indexed as

artificial intelligencecardiac CTdeep learningmachine learningqualitysegmentationsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID38317865
PMCPMC10839106

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.