ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2024
Deep-learning-based renal artery stenosis diagnosis via multimodal fusion.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial intelligence with deep convolutional neural network-based clinical decision-making on kidney Oncology using multimodal imaging.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Imaging-Based Artificial Intelligence in Vascular and Interventional Radiology: A Narrative Review.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Review
- Segmentation of renal vessels on non-enhanced CT images using deep learning models.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Article
- Pilot Study of Using Machine Learning to Detect Atherosclerotic Renal Artery Stenosis From Spectral Doppler Waveforms.Kidney international reports · 2025Article
- Federated multimodal AI for precision-equitable diabetes care.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Review
- Prediction of Vascular Access Stenosis by Lightweight Convolutional Neural Network Using Blood Flow Sound Signals.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- A Non-Coronary, Peripheral Arterial Atherosclerotic Disease (Carotid, Renal, Lower Limb) in Elderly Patients-A Review: Part I-Epidemiology, Risk Factors, and Atherosclerosis-Related Diversities in Elderly Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Deep-learning-based renal artery stenosis diagnosis via multimodal fusion.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
- Artificial Intelligence Models in Diagnosis and Treatment of Kidney Diseases: Current Status and Prospects.Kidney diseases (Basel, Switzerland)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeDiagnosing Renal artery stenosis (RAS) presents challenges. This research aimed to develop a deep learning model for the computer-aided diagnosis of RAS, utilizing multimodal fusion technology based on ultrasound scanning images, spectral waveforms, and clinical information.
methodsA total of 1485 patients received renal artery ultrasonography from Peking Union Medical College Hospital were included and their color doppler sonography (CDS) images were classified according to anatomical site and left-right orientation. The RAS diagnosis was modeled as a process involving feature extraction and multimodal fusion. Three deep learning (DL) models (ResNeSt, ResNet, and XCiT) were trained on a multimodal dataset consisted of CDS images, spectrum waveform images, and individual basic information. Predicted performance of different models were compared with senior physician and evaluated on a test dataset (N = 117 patients) with renal artery angiography results.
resultsSample sizes of training and validation datasets were 3292 and 169 respectively. On test data (N = 676 samples), predicted accuracies of three DL models were more than 80% and the ResNeSt achieved the accuracy 83.49% ± 0.45%, precision 81.89% ± 3.00%, and recall 76.97% ± 3.7%. There was no significant difference between the accuracy of ResNeSt and ResNet (82.84% ± 1.52%), and the ResNeSt was higher than the XCiT (80.71% ± 2.23%, p < 0.05). Compared to the gold standard, renal artery angiography, the accuracy of ResNest model was 78.25% ± 1.62%, which was inferior to the senior physician (90.09%). Besides, compared to the multimodal fusion model, the performance of single-modal model on spectrum waveform images was relatively lower.
conclusionThe DL multimodal fusion model shows promising results in assisting RAS diagnosis.
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.