ArticleCommunications medicine2025
Deep learning model DeepNeo predicts neointimal tissue characterization using optical coherence tomography.
Article in Communications medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond CABG vs. PCI: Contemporary and Future Coronary Revascularisation from Historical Evolution to Artificial Intelligence, Robotics, and Hybrid Strategies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Precision cardiovascular medicine with big data and AI.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Review
- AI in radiology and interventions: a structured narrative review of workflow automation, accuracy, and efficiency gains of today and what's coming.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccurate interpretation of optical coherence tomography (OCT) pullbacks is critical for assessing vascular healing after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Manual analysis is time-consuming and subjective, highlighting the need for a fully automated solution.
methodsIn this study, 1148 frames from 92 OCT pullbacks were manually annotated to classify neointima as homogeneous, heterogeneous, neoatherosclerosis, or not analyzable on a quadrant level. Stent and lumen contours were annotated in 305 frames for segmentation of the lumen, stent struts, and neointima. We used these annotations to train a deep learning algorithm called DeepNeo. Performance was further evaluated in an animal model (male New Zealand White Rabbits) of neoatherosclerosis using co-registered histopathology images as the gold standard.
resultsDeepNeo demonstrates a strong classification performance for neointimal tissue, achieving an overall accuracy of 75%, which is comparable to manual classification accuracy by two clinical experts (75% and 71%). In the animal model of neoatherosclerosis, DeepNeo achieves an accuracy of 87% when compared with histopathological findings. For segmentation tasks in human pullbacks, the algorithm shows strong performance with mean Dice overlap scores of 0.99 for the lumen, 0.66 for stent struts, and 0.86 for neointima.
conclusionsTo the best of our knowledge, DeepNeo is the first deep learning algorithm enabling fully automated segmentation and classification of neointimal tissue with performance comparable to human experts. It could standardize vascular healing assessments after PCI, support therapeutic decisions, and improve risk detection for cardiac events.
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.