Clinically focused multi-cohort benchmarking as a tool for external validation of artificial intelligence algorithm performance in basic chest radiography analysis

A Review on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Fracture Detection

Artificial intelligence (AI) simulates intelligent behavior using computers with minimum human intervention. Recent advances in AI, especially deep learning, have made significant progress in perceptual operations, enabling computers to convey and comprehend complicated input more accurately. Worldwide, fractures affect people of all ages and in all regions of the planet. One of the most prevalent causes of inaccurate diagnosis and medical lawsuits is overlooked fractures on radiographs taken in the emergency room, which can range from 2% to 9%. The workforce will soon be under a great deal of strain due to the growing demand for fracture detection on multiple imaging modalities. A dearth of radiologists worsens this rise in demand as a result of a delay in hiring and a significant percentage of radiologists close to retirement. Additionally, the process of interpreting diagnostic images can sometimes be challenging and tedious. Integrating orthopedic radio-diagnosis with AI presents a promising solution to these problems. There has recently been a noticeable rise in the application of deep learning techniques, namely convolutional neural networks (CNNs), in medical imaging. In the field of orthopedic trauma, CNNs are being documented to operate at the proficiency of expert orthopedic surgeons and radiologists in the identification and categorization of fractures. CNNs can analyze vast amounts of data at a rate that surpasses that of human observations. In this review, we discuss the use of deep learning methods in fracture detection and classification, the integration of AI with various imaging modalities, and the benefits and disadvantages of integrating AI with radio-diagnostics.

Deep learning for pneumothorax diagnosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Deep learning (DL), a subset of artificial intelligence (AI), has been applied to pneumothorax diagnosis to aid physician diagnosis, but no meta-analysis has been performed.

METHODS

A search of multiple electronic databases through September 2022 was performed to identify studies that applied DL for pneumothorax diagnosis using imaging. Meta-analysis via a hierarchical model to calculate the summary area under the curve (AUC) and pooled sensitivity and specificity for both DL and physicians was performed. Risk of bias was assessed using a modified Prediction Model Study Risk of Bias Assessment Tool.

RESULTS

In 56 of the 63 primary studies, pneumothorax was identified from chest radiography. The total AUC was 0.97 (95% CI 0.96-0.98) for both DL and physicians. The total pooled sensitivity was 84% (95% CI 79-89%) for DL and 85% (95% CI 73-92%) for physicians and the pooled specificity was 96% (95% CI 94-98%) for DL and 98% (95% CI 95-99%) for physicians. More than half of the original studies (57%) had a high risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review found the diagnostic performance of DL models was similar to that of physicians, although the majority of studies had a high risk of bias. Further pneumothorax AI research is needed.

Machine Learning Augmented Interpretation of Chest X-rays: A Systematic Review

Limitations of the chest X-ray (CXR) have resulted in attempts to create machine learning systems to assist clinicians and improve interpretation accuracy. An understanding of the capabilities and limitations of modern machine learning systems is necessary for clinicians as these tools begin to permeate practice. This systematic review aimed to provide an overview of machine learning applications designed to facilitate CXR interpretation. A systematic search strategy was executed to identify research into machine learning algorithms capable of detecting >2 radiographic findings on CXRs published between January 2020 and September 2022. Model details and study characteristics, including risk of bias and quality, were summarized. Initially, 2248 articles were retrieved, with 46 included in the final review. Published models demonstrated strong standalone performance and were typically as accurate, or more accurate, than radiologists or non-radiologist clinicians. Multiple studies demonstrated an improvement in the clinical finding classification performance of clinicians when models acted as a diagnostic assistance device. Device performance was compared with that of clinicians in 30% of studies, while effects on clinical perception and diagnosis were evaluated in 19%. Only one study was prospectively run. On average, 128,662 images were used to train and validate models. Most classified less than eight clinical findings, while the three most comprehensive models classified 54, 72, and 124 findings. This review suggests that machine learning devices designed to facilitate CXR interpretation perform strongly, improve the detection performance of clinicians, and improve the efficiency of radiology workflow. Several limitations were identified, and clinician involvement and expertise will be key to driving the safe implementation of quality CXR machine learning systems.

Frequency of Missed Findings on Chest Radiographs (CXRs) in an International, Multicenter Study: Application of AI to Reduce Missed Findings

Background: Missed findings in chest X-ray interpretation are common and can have serious consequences. Methods: Our study included 2407 chest radiographs (CXRs) acquired at three Indian and five US sites. To identify CXRs reported as normal, we used a proprietary radiology report search engine based on natural language processing (mPower, Nuance). Two thoracic radiologists reviewed all CXRs and recorded the presence and clinical significance of abnormal findings on a 5-point scale (1—not important; 5—critical importance). All CXRs were processed with the AI model (Qure.ai) and outputs were recorded for the presence of findings. Data were analyzed to obtain area under the ROC curve (AUC). Results: Of 410 CXRs (410/2407, 18.9%) with unreported/missed findings, 312 (312/410, 76.1%) findings were clinically important: pulmonary nodules (n = 157), consolidation (60), linear opacities (37), mediastinal widening (21), hilar enlargement (17), pleural effusions (11), rib fractures (6) and pneumothoraces (3). AI detected 69 missed findings (69/131, 53%) with an AUC of up to 0.935. The AI model was generalizable across different sites, geographic locations, patient genders and age groups. Conclusion: A substantial number of important CXR findings are missed; the AI model can help to identify and reduce the frequency of important missed findings in a generalizable manner.