Back

Multiethnic Validation of Artificial Intelligence-Enhanced Electrocardiographic Image Analysis in Detecting Cardiac Structural and Functional Abnormalities: A UK Biobank Study

Kim, Y.; Lee, H.; Choi, H.-M.; Hwang, I.-C.; Kim, J.; Lee, J. H.; Oh, I.-Y.; Lee, H.; Choi, S.-Y.; Rhee, T.-M.; Cho, Y.

2025-07-10 cardiovascular medicine
10.1101/2025.07.08.25331159 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundAlthough artificial intelligence-enhanced electrocardiography (AI-ECG) has shown promise in detecting cardiac abnormalities, large-scale validation against cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) parameters in a multiethnic general population remains limited. MethodsIn 38,804 UK Biobank participants with paired ECG and CMR data, we evaluated six AI-ECG models: four targeting functional abnormalities (left and right ventricular dysfunction [QCG-LVD and QCG-RVD], global longitudinal strain [ECG-LVGLS and ECG-RVGLS]) and two targeting structural abnormalities (left ventricular hypertrophy [AI-ECG-LVH] and left atrial enlargement [AI-ECG-LAE]). Abnormalities were defined as the top 1% extreme values of each CMR-derived parameter. ResultsThe AI-ECG models demonstrated robust diagnostic performance. For left ventricular dysfunction, the AUCs were 0.887 (QCG-LVD) and 0.896 (ECG-LVGLS); for right ventricular dysfunction, the AUCs were 0.778 (QCG-RVD) and 0.825 (ECG-RVGLS). In a sub-cohort with available corresponding CMR data (n=21,267), AUCs were 0.824 for AI-ECG-LVH and 0.883 for AI-ECG-LAE. Subgroup analyses showed consistent performance across demographic and clinical groups, with enhanced accuracy observed in older individuals, males, and those with hypertension. ConclusionIn this large-scale, population-based study, AI-ECG demonstrated strong performance in detecting structural and functional cardiac abnormalities defined by CMR. These findings support the potential utility of AI-ECG as a scalable screening tool for cardiovascular disease in general populations.

Matching journals

The top 3 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.