ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2025
Automated three-dimensional left atrial analysis on computed tomography angiography: reproducibility and workflow efficiency of eight clinically relevant metrics using a deep learning pipeline.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Accurate and reproducible quantification of LA anatomy from CTA is essential for ablation, LAAC, and structural interventions, yet manual measurements are time-consuming and prone to inter-observer variability. Objectives: To validate a deep learning-based CTA pipeline for automated quantification of eight clinically relevant LA metrics, and to assess its agreement, repeatability, and efficiency compared with expert measurements. Methods: In this retrospective study, 407 patients were included and divided into training (n = 270), validation (n = 87), and clinical evaluation (n = 50) cohorts. A MedNeXt-based model performed multi-structure segmentation, and a geometry-driven framework computed eight metrics: LA volume, LAA volume, AP/ML/SI diameters, left/right PV ostial size, left/right PV inter-ostial angles, and LAA ostial size. Automated outputs were compared with expert annotations using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Bland-Altman analysis (primary endpoints: LA volume and diameters). Workflow efficiency and usability (Likert scale, 1-5) were also assessed by electrophysiology/structural experts. Results: Automated measurements demonstrated excellent agreement with experts for primary endpoints (LA volume ICC = 0.999; AP/ML/SI diameter ICCs = 0.972-0.985), with minimal bias and narrow limits of agreement. Agreement for other metrics was good to excellent (typical ICCs ≥0.84). Analysis time was reduced from 15.3 ± 1.4 min to 0.5 ± 0.1 min per case (≈92% reduction; p < 0.001). Usability ratings were ≥4/5 in most cases, with 63%-76% classified as Grade A (fully usable without manual edits). Performance remained consistent across voxel-size strata. Conclusion: The proposed pipeline enables rapid, reproducible, and expert-level quantification of eight LA metrics on CTA, demonstrating technical feasibility for clinical integration pending prospective validation of procedural impact.
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.