Automated Deep Learning Pipeline for Characterizing Left Ventricular Diastolic Function
Yuan, V.; Sahashi, Y.; Ieki, H.; Vukadinovic, M.; Binder, C.; Pieszko, K.; Cheng, P. P.; Cheng, S.; Ouyang, D.
Show abstract
IntroductionLeft ventricular diastolic dysfunction (LVDD) is most commonly evaluated by echocardiography. However, without a sole identifying metric, LVDD is assessed by a diagnostic algorithm relying on secondary characteristics that is laborious and has potential for interobserver variability. MethodsTo characterize concordance in clinical evaluations of LVDD, we evaluated historical echocardiogram studies at two academic medical centers for variability between clinician text reports and assessment by 2016 American Society of Echocardiography (ASE) guidelines. We then developed a workflow of 8 artificial intelligence (AI) models trained on over 155,000 studies to automate assessment of LVDD. Model performance was evaluated on temporally distinct held-out test sets from two academic medical centers. ResultsIn a validation cohort of 955 studies from Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, our AI workflow demonstrated 76.5% agreement and a weighted Cohens kappa of 0.52 with ASE guideline assessment using human measurements. In contrast, the clinician report evaluation had 48.5% agreement and a weighted Cohens kappa of 0.29 with ASE guidelines. In the Stanford Healthcare cohort of 1,572 studies, the AI workflow had 66.7% agreement and a weighted Cohens kappa of 0.27 with ASE guidelines, while the clinician assessment had 32.7% agreement and a weighted Cohens kappa of 0.06. Performance was consistent across patient subgroups stratified by sex, age, hypertension, diabetes, obesity, and coronary artery disease. ConclusionClinicians are often inconsistent in evaluating LVDD. We developed an AI pipeline that automates the clinical workflow of grading LVDD, which can contribute to improved diagnosis of heart failure.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Simple Models Versus Deep Learning in Detecting Low Ejection Fraction From The Electrocardiogram 96%
- Multimodal deep learning enhances diagnostic precision in left ventricular hypertrophy 95%
- Development and Multinational Validation of an Ensemble Deep Learning Algorithm for Detecting and Predicting Structural Heart Disease Using Noisy Single-lead Electrocardiograms 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Natural Language Processing for the Ascertainment and Phenotyping of Left Ventricular Hypertrophy and Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy on Echocardiogram Reports 95%
- A Multicenter Evaluation of the Impact of Procedural and Pharmacological Interventions on Deep Learning-based Electrocardiographic Markers of Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy 94%
- Prognostic value of compact myocardial thinning in patients with left ventricular non-compaction 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- The HeartMagic prospective observational study protocol - characterizing subtypes of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction 93%
- Development and validation of imaging-free myocardial fibrosis prediction models, association with outcomes, and sample size estimation for phase 3 trials 92%
- Non-Invasive Scale Measurement of Cardiac Output Compared with the Gold-Standard Direct Fick Method: A Feasibility Study 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- High Throughput Deep Learning Detection of Mitral Regurgitation 97%
- Right Ventricular Sarcomere Contractile Depression and the Role of Thick Filament Activation in Human Heart Failure with Pulmonary Hypertension 91%
- Comparison of Long-term Outcomes of Early Surgery Versus Conventional Treatment for Asymptomatic Severe Mitral Regurgitation: A Propensity Analysis 91%
"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.