Back

Feasibility and visualization of deep learning detection and classification of inferior vena cava filters

Park, B. J.; Sotirchos, V. S.; Adleberg, J.; Stavropoulos, W.; Cook, T. S.; Hunt, S. J.

2020-06-08 radiology and imaging
10.1101/2020.06.06.20124321
Show abstract

PurposeThis study assesses the feasibility of deep learning detection and classification of 3 retrievable inferior vena cava filters with similar radiographic appearances and emphasizes the importance of visualization methods to confirm proper detection and classification. Materials and MethodsThe fast.ai library with ResNet-34 architecture was used to train a deep learning classification model. A total of 442 fluoroscopic images (N=144 patients) from inferior vena cava filter placement or removal were collected. Following image preprocessing, the training set included 382 images (110 Celect, 149 Denali, 123 Gunther Tulip), of which 80% were used for training and 20% for validation. Data augmentation was performed for regularization. A random test set of 60 images (20 images of each filter type), not included in the training or validation set, was used for evaluation. Total accuracy and receiver operating characteristic area under the curve were used to evaluate performance. Feature heatmaps were visualized using guided backpropagation and gradient-weighted class activation mapping. ResultsThe overall accuracy was 80.2% with mean receiver operating characteristic area under the curve of 0.96 for the validation set (N=76), and 85.0% with mean receiver operating characteristic area under the curve of 0.94 for the test set (N=60). Two visualization methods were used to assess correct filter detection and classification. ConclusionsA deep learning model can be used to automatically detect and accurately classify inferior vena cava filters on radiographic images. Visualization techniques should be utilized to ensure deep learning models function as intended.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
European Radiology
based on 11 papers
Top 0.1%
18.3%
2
Scientific Reports
based on 701 papers
Top 10%
12.0%
3
PLOS ONE
based on 1737 papers
Top 54%
8.1%
4
Diagnostics
based on 36 papers
Top 0.3%
6.3%
5
Informatics in Medicine Unlocked
based on 11 papers
Top 0.3%
4.8%
6
Computers in Biology and Medicine
based on 39 papers
Top 1%
4.8%
50% of probability mass above
7
PLOS Digital Health
based on 88 papers
Top 4%
3.0%
8
Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
based on 10 papers
Top 1%
2.4%
9
IEEE Access
based on 11 papers
Top 0.7%
1.9%
10
Archives of Clinical and Biomedical Research
based on 18 papers
Top 0.5%
1.7%
11
Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence
based on 11 papers
Top 0.9%
1.7%
12
Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
based on 11 papers
Top 0.9%
1.7%
13
Heliyon
based on 57 papers
Top 6%
1.4%
14
Nature Communications
based on 483 papers
Top 32%
1.4%
15
Annals of Translational Medicine
based on 14 papers
Top 3%
1.3%
16
Scientific Data
based on 30 papers
Top 2%
1.3%
17
Neuro-Oncology Advances
based on 14 papers
Top 1%
1.3%
18
Brain and Behavior
based on 19 papers
Top 3%
0.9%
19
Cureus
based on 64 papers
Top 15%
0.9%
20
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
based on 14 papers
Top 2%
0.9%
21
Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine
based on 12 papers
Top 1%
0.9%
22
Journal of Clinical Medicine
based on 77 papers
Top 14%
0.9%
23
NeuroImage
based on 36 papers
Top 4%
0.9%
24
Sensors
based on 18 papers
Top 3%
0.9%
25
PeerJ
based on 46 papers
Top 9%
0.9%
26
Frontiers in Medicine
based on 99 papers
Top 17%
0.9%
27
npj Digital Medicine
based on 85 papers
Top 12%
0.9%
28
Radiotherapy and Oncology
based on 11 papers
Top 2%
0.7%
29
Open Heart
based on 18 papers
Top 5%
0.7%
30
Ophthalmology Science
based on 15 papers
Top 1%
0.7%