Clinical Application of Automatic Assessment of Scoliosis Cobb Angle Based on Deep Learning.

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING Current Medical Imaging Reviews Pub Date : 2024-01-01 DOI:10.2174/0115734056278130231218073650
Lixin Ni, Zhehao Zhang, Lulin Zou, Jianhua Wang, Lijun Guo, Wei Qian, Lei Xu, Kaiwei Xu, Yingqing Zeng
{"title":"Clinical Application of Automatic Assessment of Scoliosis Cobb Angle Based on Deep Learning.","authors":"Lixin Ni, Zhehao Zhang, Lulin Zou, Jianhua Wang, Lijun Guo, Wei Qian, Lei Xu, Kaiwei Xu, Yingqing Zeng","doi":"10.2174/0115734056278130231218073650","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>A recently developed deep-learning-based automatic evaluation model provides reliable and efficient Cobb angle measurements for scoliosis diagnosis. However, few studies have explored its clinical application, and external validation is lacking. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the value of automated assessment models in clinical practice by comparing deep-learning models with manual measurement methods.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The 481 spine radiographs from an open-source dataset were divided into training and validation sets, and 119 spine radiographs from a private dataset were used as the test set. The mean Cobb angle values assessed by three physicians in the hospital's PACS system served as the reference standard. The results of Seg4Reg, VFLDN, and manual measurement were statistically analyzed. The intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) and the Pearson correlation coefficient (PCC) were used to compare their reliability and correlation. The Bland-Altman method was used to compare their agreement. The Kappa statistic was used to compare the consistency of Cobb angles at different severity levels.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean Cobb angle values measured were 35.89° ± 9.33° with Seg4Reg, 31.54° ± 9.78° with VFLDN, and 32.23° ± 9.28° with manual measurement. The ICCs for the reliability of Seg4Reg and VFLDN were 0.809 and 0.974, respectively. The PCC and MAD between Seg4Reg and manual measurements were 0.731 (p<0.001) and 6.51°, while those between VFLDN and manual measurements were 0.952 (p<0.001) and 2.36°. The Kappa statistic indicated VFLDN (k= 0.686, p< 0.001) was superior to Seg4Reg and manual measurements for Cobb angle severity classification.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The deep-learning-based automatic scoliosis Cobb angle assessment model is feasible in clinical practice. Specifically, the keypoint-based VFLDN is more valuable in actual clinical work with higher accuracy, transparency, and interpretability.</p>","PeriodicalId":54215,"journal":{"name":"Current Medical Imaging Reviews","volume":" ","pages":"e15734056278130"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Medical Imaging Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/0115734056278130231218073650","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: A recently developed deep-learning-based automatic evaluation model provides reliable and efficient Cobb angle measurements for scoliosis diagnosis. However, few studies have explored its clinical application, and external validation is lacking. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the value of automated assessment models in clinical practice by comparing deep-learning models with manual measurement methods.

Methods: The 481 spine radiographs from an open-source dataset were divided into training and validation sets, and 119 spine radiographs from a private dataset were used as the test set. The mean Cobb angle values assessed by three physicians in the hospital's PACS system served as the reference standard. The results of Seg4Reg, VFLDN, and manual measurement were statistically analyzed. The intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) and the Pearson correlation coefficient (PCC) were used to compare their reliability and correlation. The Bland-Altman method was used to compare their agreement. The Kappa statistic was used to compare the consistency of Cobb angles at different severity levels.

Results: The mean Cobb angle values measured were 35.89° ± 9.33° with Seg4Reg, 31.54° ± 9.78° with VFLDN, and 32.23° ± 9.28° with manual measurement. The ICCs for the reliability of Seg4Reg and VFLDN were 0.809 and 0.974, respectively. The PCC and MAD between Seg4Reg and manual measurements were 0.731 (p<0.001) and 6.51°, while those between VFLDN and manual measurements were 0.952 (p<0.001) and 2.36°. The Kappa statistic indicated VFLDN (k= 0.686, p< 0.001) was superior to Seg4Reg and manual measurements for Cobb angle severity classification.

Conclusion: The deep-learning-based automatic scoliosis Cobb angle assessment model is feasible in clinical practice. Specifically, the keypoint-based VFLDN is more valuable in actual clinical work with higher accuracy, transparency, and interpretability.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于深度学习的脊柱侧弯 Cobb 角度自动评估的临床应用。
简介最近开发的一种基于深度学习的自动评估模型可为脊柱侧弯诊断提供可靠、高效的 Cobb 角度测量。然而,很少有研究探讨其临床应用,也缺乏外部验证。因此,本研究旨在通过比较深度学习模型和人工测量方法,探索自动评估模型在临床实践中的价值:将开源数据集中的 481 张脊柱X光片分为训练集和验证集,将私有数据集中的 119 张脊柱X光片作为测试集。医院 PACS 系统中由三位医生评估的平均 Cobb 角值作为参考标准。对 Seg4Reg、VFLDN 和人工测量的结果进行了统计分析。使用类内相关系数(ICC)和皮尔逊相关系数(PCC)来比较它们的可靠性和相关性。采用 Bland-Altman 方法比较两者的一致性。卡帕统计法用于比较不同严重程度的 Cobb 角的一致性:Seg4Reg测量的平均Cobb角值为35.89° ± 9.33°,VFLDN测量的平均Cobb角值为31.54° ± 9.78°,人工测量的平均Cobb角值为32.23° ± 9.28°。Seg4Reg 和 VFLDN 的可靠性 ICC 分别为 0.809 和 0.974。Seg4Reg 和人工测量的 PCC 和 MAD 分别为 0.731(pConclusion):基于深度学习的脊柱侧弯 Cobb 角自动评估模型在临床实践中是可行的。具体而言,基于关键点的 VFLDN 在实际临床工作中更有价值,具有更高的准确性、透明度和可解释性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
246
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Current Medical Imaging Reviews publishes frontier review articles, original research articles, drug clinical trial studies and guest edited thematic issues on all the latest advances on medical imaging dedicated to clinical research. All relevant areas are covered by the journal, including advances in the diagnosis, instrumentation and therapeutic applications related to all modern medical imaging techniques. The journal is essential reading for all clinicians and researchers involved in medical imaging and diagnosis.
期刊最新文献
Advanced Lung Disease Detection: CBAM-Augmented, Lightweight EfficientNetB2 with Visual Insights. Multiple Pulmonary Sclerosing Haemangiomas with a Cavity: A Case Report and Review of the Literature. An Integrated Approach using YOLOv8 and ResNet, SeResNet & Vision Transformer (ViT) Algorithms based on ROI Fracture Prediction in X-ray Images of the Elbow. Combination of Different Sectional Elastography Techniques with Age to Optimize the Downgrading of Breast BI-RAIDS Class 4a Nodules. Prenatal Three-Dimensional Ultrasound Diagnosis of Dural Sinus Arteriovenous Malformation: An Unusual Case Report.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1