求助PDF
{"title":"Accuracy of Fully Automated and Human-assisted Artificial Intelligence-based CT Quantification of Pleural Effusion Changes after Thoracentesis.","authors":"Eui Jin Hwang, Hyunsook Hong, Seungyeon Ko, Seung-Jin Yoo, Hyungjin Kim, Dahee Kim, Soon Ho Yoon","doi":"10.1148/ryai.240215","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Quantifying pleural effusion change at chest CT is important for evaluating disease severity and treatment response. The purpose of this study was to assess the accuracy of artificial intelligence (AI)-based volume quantification of pleural effusion change on CT images, using the volume of drained fluid as the reference standard. Seventy-nine participants (mean age ± SD, 65 years ± 13; 47 male) undergoing thoracentesis were prospectively enrolled from October 2021 to September 2023. Chest CT scans were obtained just before and after thoracentesis. The volume of pleural fluid on each CT scan, with the difference representing the drained fluid volume, was measured by automated segmentation (fully automated measurement). An expert thoracic radiologist then manually corrected these automated volume measurements (human-assisted measurement). Both fully automated (median percentage error, 13.1%; maximum estimated 95% error, 708 mL) and human-assisted measurements (median percentage error, 10.9%; maximum estimated 95% error, 312 mL) systematically underestimated the volume of drained fluid, beyond the equivalence margin. The magnitude of underestimation increased proportionally to the drainage volume. Agreements between fully automated and human-assisted measurements (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC], 0.99) and the test-retest reliability of fully automated (ICC, 0.995) and human-assisted (ICC, 0.997) measurements were excellent. These results highlight a potential systematic discrepancy between AI segmentation-based CT quantification of pleural effusion volume change and actual volume change. <b>Keywords:</b> CT-Quantitative, Thorax, Pleura, Segmentation Clinical Research Information Service registration no. KCT0006683 <i>Supplemental material is available for this article.</i> © RSNA, 2025.</p>","PeriodicalId":29787,"journal":{"name":"Radiology-Artificial Intelligence","volume":" ","pages":"e240215"},"PeriodicalIF":8.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiology-Artificial Intelligence","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1148/ryai.240215","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
引用
批量引用
Abstract
Quantifying pleural effusion change at chest CT is important for evaluating disease severity and treatment response. The purpose of this study was to assess the accuracy of artificial intelligence (AI)-based volume quantification of pleural effusion change on CT images, using the volume of drained fluid as the reference standard. Seventy-nine participants (mean age ± SD, 65 years ± 13; 47 male) undergoing thoracentesis were prospectively enrolled from October 2021 to September 2023. Chest CT scans were obtained just before and after thoracentesis. The volume of pleural fluid on each CT scan, with the difference representing the drained fluid volume, was measured by automated segmentation (fully automated measurement). An expert thoracic radiologist then manually corrected these automated volume measurements (human-assisted measurement). Both fully automated (median percentage error, 13.1%; maximum estimated 95% error, 708 mL) and human-assisted measurements (median percentage error, 10.9%; maximum estimated 95% error, 312 mL) systematically underestimated the volume of drained fluid, beyond the equivalence margin. The magnitude of underestimation increased proportionally to the drainage volume. Agreements between fully automated and human-assisted measurements (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC], 0.99) and the test-retest reliability of fully automated (ICC, 0.995) and human-assisted (ICC, 0.997) measurements were excellent. These results highlight a potential systematic discrepancy between AI segmentation-based CT quantification of pleural effusion volume change and actual volume change. Keywords: CT-Quantitative, Thorax, Pleura, Segmentation Clinical Research Information Service registration no. KCT0006683 Supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 2025.
全自动和人工智能辅助 CT 定量胸腔穿刺术后胸腔积液变化的准确性。
“刚刚接受”的论文经过了全面的同行评审,并已被接受发表在《放射学:人工智能》杂志上。这篇文章将经过编辑,布局和校样审查,然后在其最终版本出版。请注意,在最终编辑文章的制作过程中,可能会发现可能影响内容的错误。定量胸膜积液在胸部CT上的变化是评估疾病严重程度和治疗效果的重要指标。本研究旨在以排液体积为参考标准,评估基于人工智能(AI)的CT图像胸膜积液容积定量的准确性。79名参与者(平均年龄65±[SD] 13岁;在2021年10月至2023年9月期间,前瞻性地招募了47名男性进行胸腔穿刺。胸腔穿刺前后分别行胸部ct检查。通过自动分割(全自动测量)测量每次CT扫描的胸膜液体积,其差值代表排出的液体体积。胸科放射科专家然后手动纠正这些自动体积测量(人工辅助测量)。两者都是全自动的(误差中位数为13.1%;最大估计95%误差范围,708 mL)和人工辅助测量(中位数百分比误差,10.9%;最大估计误差范围为95% (312 mL),系统地低估了排液的体积,超出了等效范围。低估幅度随排水体积的增大而增大。全自动和人工辅助测量(类内相关系数[ICC], 0.99)、全自动测量(ICC, 0.995)和人工辅助测量(ICC, 0.997)的重测信度之间的一致性非常好。这些结果突出了基于人工智能分割的胸腔积液体积变化的CT量化与实际体积变化之间潜在的系统性差异。©RSNA, 2025年。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。