Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40395414›Full record

ArticleEuropean heart journal. Digital health2025

Examination of the performance of machine learning-based automated coronary plaque characterization by near-infrared spectroscopy-intravascular ultrasound and optical coherence tomography with histology.

Retesh Bajaj, Ramya Parasa, Alexander Broersen, Thomas Johnson, Mohil Garg, Francesco Prati, Murat Çap, Nathan Angelo Lecaros Yap, Medeni Karaduman, Carol Ann Glorioso Rexen Busk and 9 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European heart journal. Digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
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

19 authors.

Retesh BajajDepartment of Cardiology, Barts Heart Centre, Barts Health NHS Trust, West Smithfield, London EC1A 7BE, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7424-0419
Ramya ParasaDepartment of Cardiology, Barts Heart Centre, Barts Health NHS Trust, West Smithfield, London EC1A 7BE, UK.
Alexander BroersenDivision of Image Processing, Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Thomas JohnsonDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK.
Mohil GargDepartment of Cardiology, Medstar Cardiovascular Research Network, Medstar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3986-7544
Francesco PratiCardiovascular Sciences Department, Interventional Cardiology Unit, San Giovanni Addolorata Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Murat ÇapDepartment of Cardiology, Barts Heart Centre, Barts Health NHS Trust, West Smithfield, London EC1A 7BE, UK.
Nathan Angelo Lecaros YapCentre for Cardiovascular Medicine and Device Innovation, William Harvey Research Institute, John Vane Science Centre, Charterhouse Square, London EC1M 6BQ, UK.
Medeni KaradumanDepartment of Cardiology, Faculty of Medicine, Yuzuncu Yil University, Van, Turkey.
Carol Ann Glorioso Rexen BuskHealth Sciences Research Centre, UCL University College, Niels Bohrs Allé 1, 5230 Odense M, Denmark.
Stephanie GraingerInfraredx, Bedford, MA, USA.
Steven WhiteBiosciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle, UK.
Anthony MathurDepartment of Cardiology, Barts Heart Centre, Barts Health NHS Trust, West Smithfield, London EC1A 7BE, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7941-9653
Hector M García-GarcíaDepartment of Cardiology, Medstar Cardiovascular Research Network, Medstar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC, USA.
Jouke DijkstraDepartment of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Ryo ToriiDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9479-8719
Andreas BaumbachDepartment of Cardiology, Barts Heart Centre, Barts Health NHS Trust, West Smithfield, London EC1A 7BE, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7707-2254
Helle PrechtHealth Sciences Research Centre, UCL University College, Niels Bohrs Allé 1, 5230 Odense M, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1525-5316
Christos V BourantasDepartment of Cardiology, Barts Heart Centre, Barts Health NHS Trust, West Smithfield, London EC1A 7BE, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aims: Near-infrared spectroscopy-intravascular ultrasound (NIRS-IVUS) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) can assess coronary plaque pathology but are limited by time-consuming and expertise-driven image analysis. Recently introduced machine learning (ML)-classifiers have expedited image processing, but their performance in assessing plaque pathology against histological standards remains unclear. The aim of this study is to assess the performance of NIRS-IVUS-ML-based and OCT-ML-based plaque characterization against a histological standard. Methods and results: Matched histological and NIRS-IVUS/OCT frames from human cadaveric hearts were manually annotated and fibrotic (FT), calcific (Ca), and necrotic core (NC) regions of interest (ROIs) were identified. Near-infrared spectroscopy-intravascular ultrasound and OCT frames were processed by their respective ML classifiers to segment and characterize plaque components. The histologically defined ROIs were overlaid onto corresponding NIRS-IVUS/OCT frames and the ML classifier estimations were compared with histology. In total, 131 pairs of NIRS-IVUS/histology and 184 pairs of OCT/histology were included. The agreement of NIRS-IVUS-ML with histology [concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) 0.81 and 0.88] was superior to OCT-ML (CCC 0.64 and 0.73) for the plaque area and burden. Plaque compositional analysis showed a substantial agreement of the NIRS-IVUS-ML with histology for FT, Ca, and NC ROIs (CCC: 0.73, 0.75, and 0.66, respectively) while the agreement of the OCT-ML with histology was 0.42, 0.62, and 0.13, respectively. The overall accuracy of NIRS-IVUS-ML and OCT-ML for characterizing atheroma types was 83% and 72%, respectively. Conclusion: NIRS-IVUS-ML plaque compositional analysis has a good performance in assessing plaque components while OCT-ML performs well for the FT, moderately for the Ca, and has weak performance in detecting NC tissue. This may be attributable to the limitations of standalone intravascular imaging and to the fact that the OCT-ML classifier was trained on human experts rather than histological standards.

Indexed as

HistologyMachine learningNear-infrared spectroscopy–intravascular ultrasoundOptical coherence tomographyPlaque composition

Identifiers

PMID40395414
PMCPMC12088723

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.