Artificial Intelligence-Driven Assessment of Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography for Intermediate Stenosis: Comparison With Quantitative Coronary Angiography and Fractional Flow Reserve

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS American Journal of Cardiology Pub Date : 2024-12-11 DOI:10.1016/j.amjcard.2024.12.011
Jung In Jo MD , Hyun Jung Koo MD , Joon Won Kang MD , Young Hak Kim MD , Dong Hyun Yang MD
{"title":"Artificial Intelligence-Driven Assessment of Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography for Intermediate Stenosis: Comparison With Quantitative Coronary Angiography and Fractional Flow Reserve","authors":"Jung In Jo MD ,&nbsp;Hyun Jung Koo MD ,&nbsp;Joon Won Kang MD ,&nbsp;Young Hak Kim MD ,&nbsp;Dong Hyun Yang MD","doi":"10.1016/j.amjcard.2024.12.011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>We aimed to compare artificial intelligence (AI)-based coronary stenosis evaluation of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) with its quantitative counterpart of invasive coronary angiography (ICA) and invasive fractional flow reserve (FFR). This single-center retrospective study included 195 symptomatic patients (mean age 61 ± 10 years, 149 men, 585 coronary arteries) with 215 intermediate coronary lesions, with quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) diameter stenosis ranging from 20% to 80%. An AI-driven research prototype (AI-CCTA) was used to quantify stenosis on CCTA images. The diagnostic accuracy of AI-CCTA was assessed on a per-vessel basis using ICA stenosis grading (with ≥50% stenosis) or invasive FFR (≤0.80) as reference standards. AI-driven diameter stenosis was correlated with the QCA results and expert manual measurements subsequently. The disease prevalence in the 585 coronary arteries, as determined by invasive angiography (≥50%), was 46.5%. AI-CCTA exhibited sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and area under the curve (AUC) of 71.7%, 89.8%, 85.9%, 78.5%, and 0.81, respectively. The diagnostic performance of AI-CCTA was moderate for the 215 intermediate lesions assessed using QCA and FFR, with an AUC of 0.63 for QCA and FFR. AI-CCTA demonstrated a moderate correlation with QCA (r = 0.42, p &lt;0.001) for measuring the degree of stenosis, which was notably better than the results from manual quantification versus QCA (r = 0.26, p = 0.001). In conclusion, AI-driven CCTA analysis exhibited promising results. AI-CCTA demonstrated a moderate relation with QCA in intermediate coronary stenosis lesions; however, its results surpassed those of manual evaluations.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7705,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Cardiology","volume":"239 ","pages":"Pages 82-89"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002914924008555","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We aimed to compare artificial intelligence (AI)-based coronary stenosis evaluation of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) with its quantitative counterpart of invasive coronary angiography (ICA) and invasive fractional flow reserve (FFR). This single-center retrospective study included 195 symptomatic patients (mean age 61 ± 10 years, 149 men, 585 coronary arteries) with 215 intermediate coronary lesions, with quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) diameter stenosis ranging from 20% to 80%. An AI-driven research prototype (AI-CCTA) was used to quantify stenosis on CCTA images. The diagnostic accuracy of AI-CCTA was assessed on a per-vessel basis using ICA stenosis grading (with ≥50% stenosis) or invasive FFR (≤0.80) as reference standards. AI-driven diameter stenosis was correlated with the QCA results and expert manual measurements subsequently. The disease prevalence in the 585 coronary arteries, as determined by invasive angiography (≥50%), was 46.5%. AI-CCTA exhibited sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and area under the curve (AUC) of 71.7%, 89.8%, 85.9%, 78.5%, and 0.81, respectively. The diagnostic performance of AI-CCTA was moderate for the 215 intermediate lesions assessed using QCA and FFR, with an AUC of 0.63 for QCA and FFR. AI-CCTA demonstrated a moderate correlation with QCA (r = 0.42, p <0.001) for measuring the degree of stenosis, which was notably better than the results from manual quantification versus QCA (r = 0.26, p = 0.001). In conclusion, AI-driven CCTA analysis exhibited promising results. AI-CCTA demonstrated a moderate relation with QCA in intermediate coronary stenosis lesions; however, its results surpassed those of manual evaluations.
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
人工智能驱动的冠状动脉 CT 血管造影对中度狭窄的评估:与定量冠状动脉造影和分数血流储备的比较
我们旨在比较基于人工智能(AI)的冠状动脉CT血管造影(CCTA)与有创冠状动脉造影(ICA)和有创分数血流储备(FFR)的定量评估。本单中心回顾性研究纳入195例有症状患者(平均年龄61±10岁,男性149例,冠状动脉585条),215例中度冠状动脉病变,定量冠状动脉造影(QCA)内径狭窄范围为20-80%。人工智能驱动的研究原型(AI-CCTA)用于量化CCTA图像上的狭窄。采用有创冠状动脉造影狭窄分级(狭窄≥50%)或有创FFR(≤0.80)作为参考标准,以每根血管为基础评估AI-CCTA的诊断准确性。人工智能驱动的内径狭窄与QCA结果和随后的专家人工测量相关。有创血管造影(≥50%)测定的585条冠状动脉的患病率为46.5%。AI-CCTA的敏感性为71.7%,特异性为89.8%,阳性预测值为85.9%,阴性预测值为78.5%,曲线下面积(AUC)为0.81。AI-CCTA对使用QCA和FFR评估的215个中间病变的诊断性能一般,QCA和FFR的AUC为0.63。AI-CCTA与QCA测量狭窄程度有中度相关性(r=0.42, p < 0.001),明显优于人工定量与QCA测量的结果(r=0.26, p=0.001)。总之,人工智能驱动的CCTA分析显示出有希望的结果。在中度冠状动脉狭窄病变中,AI-CCTA与QCA呈正相关;然而,其结果超过了人工评价的结果。
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
American Journal of Cardiology
American Journal of Cardiology 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
3.60%
发文量
698
审稿时长
33 days
期刊介绍: Published 24 times a year, The American Journal of Cardiology® is an independent journal designed for cardiovascular disease specialists and internists with a subspecialty in cardiology throughout the world. AJC is an independent, scientific, peer-reviewed journal of original articles that focus on the practical, clinical approach to the diagnosis and treatment of cardiovascular disease. AJC has one of the fastest acceptance to publication times in Cardiology. Features report on systemic hypertension, methodology, drugs, pacing, arrhythmia, preventive cardiology, congestive heart failure, valvular heart disease, congenital heart disease, and cardiomyopathy. Also included are editorials, readers'' comments, and symposia.
期刊最新文献
Prospective Comparison of Temporal Myocardial Function in Men versus Women After Anterior ST-elevation Myocardial Infarction with Timely Reperfusion. The Relationship Between Syncope and Cardiac Index in Acute Pulmonary Embolism. Editorial Board Contents Adequacy of Loop Diuretic Dosing in Treatment of Acute Heart Failure: Insights from the BAN-ADHF Diuretic Resistance Risk Score.
×
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