Developing, Purchasing, Implementing and Monitoring AI Tools in Radiology: Practical Considerations. A Multi-Society Statement from the ACR, CAR, ESR, RANZCR and RSNA

Is Automatic Tumor Segmentation on Whole-Body 18F-FDG PET Images a Clinical Reality?

The integration of automated whole-body tumor segmentation using 18F-FDG PET/CT images represents a pivotal shift in oncologic diagnostics, enhancing the precision and efficiency of tumor burden assessment. This editorial examines the transition toward automation, propelled by advancements in artificial intelligence, notably through deep learning techniques. We highlight the current availability of commercial tools and the academic efforts that have set the stage for these developments. Further, we comment on the challenges of data diversity, validation needs, and regulatory barriers. The role of metabolic tumor volume and total lesion glycolysis as vital metrics in cancer management underscores the significance of this evaluation. Despite promising progress, we call for increased collaboration across academia, clinical users, and industry to better realize the clinical benefits of automated segmentation, thus helping to streamline workflows and improve patient outcomes in oncology.

AI-based automated evaluation of image quality and protocol tailoring in patients undergoing MRI for suspected prostate cancer

PURPOSE

To develop and validate an artificial intelligence (AI) application in a clinical setting to decide whether dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) sequences are necessary in multiparametric prostate MRI.

METHODS

This study was approved by the institutional review board and requirement for study-specific informed consent was waived. A mobile app was developed to integrate AI-based image quality analysis into clinical workflow. An expert radiologist provided reference decisions. Diagnostic performance parameters (sensitivity and specificity) were calculated and inter-reader agreement was evaluated.

RESULTS

Fully automated evaluation was possible in 87% of cases, with the application reaching a sensitivity of 80% and a specificity of 100% in selecting patients for multiparametric MRI. In 2% of patients, the application falsely decided on omitting DCE. With a technician reaching a sensitivity of 29% and specificity of 98%, and resident radiologists reaching sensitivity of 29% and specificity of 93%, the use of the application allowed a significant increase in sensitivity.

CONCLUSION

The presented AI application accurately decides on a patient-specific MRI protocol based on image quality analysis, potentially allowing omission of DCE in the diagnostic workup of patients with suspected prostate cancer. This could streamline workflow and optimize time utilization of healthcare professionals.