Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38617165›Full record

ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2024

Compare deep learning model and conventional logistic regression model for the identification of unstable saccular intracranial aneurysms in computed tomography angiography.

Lu Zeng, Xiao-Yan Zhao, Li Wen, Yang Jing, Jing-Xu Xu, Chen-Cui Huang, Dong Zhang, Guang-Xian Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2024. 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. Systematic Review of Radiomics and Artificial Intelligence in Intracranial Aneurysm Management.Journal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of Neuroimaging
    Pooled it
  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

8 authors.

Lu Zeng *Department of Radiology, Banan Hospital, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Xiao-Yan Zhao *Department of Radiology, Banan Hospital, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Li WenDepartment of Radiology, Xinqiao Hospital, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Army Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Yang JingHuiying Medical Technology (Beijing), Beijing, China.
Jing-Xu XuDepartment of Research Collaboration, R&D center, Beijing Deepwise & League of PHD Technology Co., Ltd., Beijing, China.
Chen-Cui HuangDepartment of Research Collaboration, R&D center, Beijing Deepwise & League of PHD Technology Co., Ltd., Beijing, China.
Dong ZhangDepartment of Radiology, Xinqiao Hospital, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Army Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Guang-Xian WangDepartment of Radiology, Banan Hospital, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: It is crucial to distinguish unstable from stable intracranial aneurysms (IAs) as early as possible to derive optimal clinical decision-making for further treatment or follow-up. The aim of this study was to investigate the value of a deep learning model (DLM) in identifying unstable IAs from computed tomography angiography (CTA) images and to compare its discriminatory ability with that of a conventional logistic regression model (LRM). Methods: From August 2011 to May 2021, a total of 1,049 patients with 681 unstable IAs and 556 stable IAs were retrospectively analyzed. IAs were randomly divided into training (64%), internal validation (16%), and test sets (20%). Convolutional neural network (CNN) analysis and conventional logistic regression (LR) were used to predict which IAs were unstable. The area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were calculated to evaluate the discriminating ability of the models. One hundred and ninety-seven patients with 229 IAs from Banan Hospital were used for external validation sets. Results: The conventional LRM showed 11 unstable risk factors, including clinical and IA characteristics. The LRM had an AUC of 0.963 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.941-0.986], a sensitivity, specificity and accuracy on the external validation set of 0.922, 0.906, and 0.913, respectively, in predicting unstable IAs. In predicting unstable IAs, the DLM had an AUC of 0.771 (95% CI: 0.582-0.960), a sensitivity, specificity and accuracy on the external validation set of 0.694, 0.929, and 0.782, respectively. Conclusions: The CNN-based DLM applied to CTA images did not outperform the conventional LRM in predicting unstable IAs. The patient clinical and IA morphological parameters remain critical factors for ensuring IA stability. Further studies are needed to enhance the diagnostic accuracy.

Indexed as

computed tomography angiography (CTA)convolutional neural network (CNN)deep learningIntracranial aneurysms (IAs)stability

Identifiers

PMID38617165
PMCPMC11007515

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.