{"title":"基于深度学习的脊柱侧弯 Cobb 角度自动评估的临床应用。","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":"{\"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}","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}
Clinical Application of Automatic Assessment of Scoliosis Cobb Angle Based on Deep Learning.
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.
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.