Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42582707›Full record

ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2026

Comparative evaluation of artificial intelligence-deep learning-based cine short-axis segmentation and manual post-processing for left ventricular function and structure in cardiac magnetic resonance.

Yanghao Lin, Wenwei Zhong, Junfeng Yao, Jinliang Zeng, Zheng Zhong, Qimin Li, Ting Song

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Yanghao LinDepartment of Radiology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University Yuedong Hospital, Meizhou, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-3688-1083
Wenwei ZhongDepartment of Radiology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University Yuedong Hospital, Meizhou, China.
Junfeng YaoDepartment of Radiology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University Yuedong Hospital, Meizhou, China.
Jinliang ZengDepartment of Radiology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University Yuedong Hospital, Meizhou, China.
Zheng ZhongDepartment of Radiology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University Yuedong Hospital, Meizhou, China.
Qimin LiDepartment of Radiology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University Yuedong Hospital, Meizhou, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-9136-1873
Ting SongDepartment of Radiology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3099-0968

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) is the reference standard for evaluating left ventricular (LV) function and structure. Manual post-processing is time-consuming, operator-dependent, and limited in reproducibility. Deep learning-based artificial intelligence (AI-DL) offers automated image segmentation with expert-level accuracy, but requires clinical validation against manual analysis. This study aimed to directly compare two AI-DL segmentation strategies-simplified (trabeculae and papillary muscles included in blood pool) and standard (included in myocardium)-with manual analysis to determine which approach yields superior clinical agreement. Methods: We retrospectively studied 104 patients who underwent CMR. Using both AI-DL (simplified/standard) methods and traditional manual post-processing software, we quantified LV parameters including ejection fraction (EF), end-diastolic volume and index (EDV/EDVI), end-systolic volume and index (ESV/ESVI), stroke volume and index (SV/SI), cardiac output and index (CO/CI), and end-diastolic LV-mass and index (M/MI). Analysis time, correlation, and agreement with manual results were compared. Results: AI-DL markedly reduced analysis time compared with manual post-processing following standard method (median 50.0 Conclusions: AI-DL enables rapid and reliable quantification of LV function and structure in CMR. Although both simplified and standard methods show strong agreement with manual analysis, the standard method provides better agreement and narrower limits of difference, making it more clinically acceptable. These findings highlight the potential of AI-DL as a practical tool for routine cardiac functional assessment.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligence (AI)cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR)comparisondeep learningfunction and structure parameters

Identifiers

PMID42582707
PMCPMC13458044

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.