ArticleEuropean radiology experimental2025
Automated AI detection of thoracic aortic dissection on CT imaging.
Article in European radiology experimental, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Time Is Aorta: Can Artificial Intelligence Improve Surgical Timelines in Acute Type A Aortic Dissection? A Comprehensive Review.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Comparative Performance of Multimodal and Unimodal Large Language Models Versus Multicenter Human Clinical Experts in Aortic Dissection Management.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAortic dissection (AD) is a life-threatening condition. We developed an artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm capable of robust, accurate, and automated AD detection and sub-classification. MATERIALS AND
methodsBased on 2010-2023 data from Mannheim University Medical Centre, heterogeneous internal training cases with confirmed AD (n = 70) were manually segmented and, together with non-AD cases (n = 87), used for training of a convolutional neural network (CNN; U-Net architecture) configured using the nnU-Net framework. Internal test dataset was composed of 106 cases. The external test was performed on a public dataset: 100 AD cases from ImageTBAD, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, China, and 38 non-AD cases from the AVT dataset (multiple sources). Model performance was evaluated by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC), sensitivity, specificity, precision, and F1-score, and by investigating performance on different subsets of cases. Confidence intervals were determined using DeLong's method and bootstrapping.
resultsThe best-performing algorithm achieved an AUROC of 98.7% (95% CI: 96.1-100.0%) and an AUPRC of 98.9% (96.0-100.0%) on the internal test dataset, 97.0% (94.7-99.3%) and 99.06% (98.0-99.7%) on the external test datasets, respectively. In the internal test dataset, of 15 unsuspected AD cases, 14 (93.3%) were successfully detected by the algorithm. On the external test dataset, sensitivity, specificity, precision, and F1-score were 92.0%, 100.0%, 100.0%, and 95.8%, respectively.
conclusionThe developed AI pipeline highlighted the capability of optimized CNNs to reliably detect AD across heterogeneous multicenter datasets. The resulting tool will be made publicly available for further scientific evaluation. RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Artificial Intelligence demonstrated promising potential to detect AD on heterogeneous thoracic CT imaging data. KEY POINTS: Early detection of aortic dissection (AD) is crucial for timely treatment. A modern convolutional neural network (CNN) achieved 93.5% sensitivity and 100.0% specificity for AD detection on multicenter, heterogeneous CT data. These results demonstrate the potential of streamlined, optimized CNNs for robust AD detection on CT, supporting fast clinical response.
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.