Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40485867›Full record

ArticleCureus2025

Multimodal Artificial Intelligence Using Endoscopic USG, CT, and MRI to Differentiate Between Serous and Mucinous Cystic Neoplasms.

Katsushi Seza, Katsunobu Tawada, Akitoshi Kobayashi, Kazuyoshi Nakamura

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Katsushi SezaGastroenterology, Chiba Medical Center, Chiba, JPN.
Katsunobu TawadaGastroenterology, Chiba Kaihin Municipal Hospital, Chiba, JPN.
Akitoshi KobayashiGastroenterology, Funabashi Municipal Medical Center, Funabashi, JPN.
Kazuyoshi NakamuraGastroenterology, Chiba Cancer Center, Chiba, JPN.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction Serous cystic neoplasms (SCN) and mucinous cystic neoplasms (MCN) often exhibit similar imaging features when evaluated with a single imaging modality. Differentiating between SCN and MCN typically necessitates the utilization of multiple imaging techniques, including computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS). Recent research indicates that artificial intelligence (AI) can effectively distinguish between SCN and MCN using single-modal imaging. Despite these advancements, the diagnostic performance of AI has not yet reached an optimal level. This study compares the efficacy of AI in classifying SCN and MCN using multimodal imaging versus single-modal imaging. The objective was to assess the effectiveness of AI utilizing multimodal imaging with EUS, CT, and MRI to classify these two types of pancreatic cysts. Methods We retrospectively gathered data from 25 patients with surgically confirmed SCN and 24 patients with surgically confirmed MCN as part of a multicenter study. Imaging was conducted using four modalities: EUS, early-phase contrast-enhanced abdominal CT, T2-weighted MRI, and magnetic resonance pancreatography. Four images per modality were obtained for each tumor. Data augmentation techniques were utilized, resulting in a final dataset of 39,200 images per modality. An AI model with ResNet was employed to categorize the cysts as SCN or MCN, incorporating clinical features and combinations of imaging modalities (single, double, triple, and all four modalities). The classification outcomes were compared with those of five experienced gastroenterologists with over 10 years of experience. The comparison is based on three performance metrics: sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy. Results For AI utilizing a single imaging modality, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 87.0%, 92.7%, and 90.8%, respectively. Combining two imaging modalities improved the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy to 95.3%, 95.1%, and 94.9%. With three modalities, AI achieved a sensitivity of 96.0%, a specificity of 99.0%, and an accuracy of 97.0%. Ultimately, employing all four imaging modalities resulted in AI achieving 98.0% sensitivity, 100% specificity, and 99.0% accuracy. In contrast, experts utilizing all four modalities attained a sensitivity of 78.0%, specificity of 82.0%, and accuracy of 81.0%. The AI models consistently outperformed the experts across all metrics. A continuous enhancement in performance was observed with each additional imaging modality, with AI utilizing three and four modalities significantly surpassing single-modal imaging AI. Conclusion AI utilizing multimodal imaging offers better performance compared to both single-modal imaging AI and experienced human experts in classifying SCN and MCN.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencediagnostic accuracyendoscopic ultrasoundmucinous cystic neoplasmmultimodal imagingpancreatic cystic neoplasmsserous cystic neoplasm

Identifiers

PMID40485867
PMCPMC12145510

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.