Back

Coronary Artery Calcium Scans Powered by Artificial Intelligence Predicts Atrial Fibrillation Comparably to Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA)

Naghavi, M.; Reeves, A. P.; Atlas, K. C.; LI, D.; Goodarzynejad, H.; Zhang, C.; Atlas, T. L.; Henschke, C.; Budoff, M. J.; Yankelevitz, D.

2024-01-04 radiology and imaging
10.1101/2024.01.04.24300746 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundApplying artificial intelligence to coronary artery calcium computed tomography scan (AI-CAC) provides more actionable information beyond the Agatston coronary artery calcium (CAC) score. We have recently shown that AI-CAC automated left atrial (LA) volumetry enabled prediction of atrial fibrillation (AF) in as early as one year. In this study we evaluated the performance of AI-CAC automated LA volumetry versus LA volume measured by human experts using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMRI) for predicting AF, and compared them with CHARGE-AF risk score, Agatston score, and NT-proBNP (BNP). MethodsWe used 15-year outcome data from 3552 asymptomatic individuals (52.2% women, ages 45-84 years) who underwent both CAC scans and CMRI in the baseline examination (2000-2002) of the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). AI-CAC took on average 21 seconds per scan. CMRI LA volume was previously measured by human experts. Data on BNP, CHARGE-AF risk score and the Agatston score were obtained from MESA. ResultsOver 15 years follow-up, 562 cases of AF accrued. The ROC AUC for AI-CAC versus CMRI and CHARGE-AF were not significantly different (AUC 0.807, 0.808, 0.800 respectively, p=0.60). The AUC for BNP (0.707) and Agatston score (0.694) were significantly lower than the rest (p<.0001). AI-CAC and CMRI significantly improved the continuous Net Reclassification Index (NRI) for prediction of AF when added to CHARGE-AF risk score (0.28, 0.31), BNP (0.43, 0.32), and Agatston score (0.69, 0.41) respectively (p for all<0.0001). ConclusionAI-CAC automated LA volumetry and CMRI LA volume measured by human experts similarly predicted incident AF over 15 years.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.