Artificial intelligence improves the accuracy of residents in the diagnosis of hip fractures: a multicenter study.
Journal
BMC musculoskeletal disorders
ISSN: 1471-2474
Titre abrégé: BMC Musculoskelet Disord
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968565
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 May 2021
03 May 2021
Historique:
received:
11
09
2020
accepted:
14
04
2021
entrez:
4
5
2021
pubmed:
5
5
2021
medline:
15
5
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Less experienced clinicians sometimes make misdiagnosis of hip fractures. We developed computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) system for hip fractures on plain X-rays using a deep learning model trained on a large dataset. In this study, we examined whether the accuracy of the diagnosis of hip fracture of the residents could be improved by using this system. A deep convolutional neural network approach was used for machine learning. Pytorch 1.3 and Fast.ai 1.0 were applied as frameworks, and an EfficientNet-B4 model (a pre-trained ImageNet model) was used. We handled the 5295 X-rays from the patients with femoral neck fracture or femoral trochanteric fracture from 2009 to 2019. We excluded cases in which the bilateral hips were not included within an image range, and cases of femoral shaft fracture and periprosthetic fracture. Finally, we included 5242 AP pelvic X-rays from 4851 cases. We divided these 5242 images into two images per image, and prepared 5242 images including fracture site and 5242 images without fracture site. Thus, a total of 10,484 images were used for machine learning. The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, F-value, and area under the curve (AUC) were assessed. Gradient-weighted class activation mapping (Grad-CAM) was used to conceptualize the basis for the diagnosis of the fracture by the deep learning algorithm. Secondly, we conducted a controlled experiment with clinicians. Thirty-one residents;young doctors within 2 years of graduation from medical school who rotate through various specialties, were tested using 300 hip fracture images that were randomly extracted from the dataset. We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy with and without the use of the CAD system for each of the 300 images. The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, F-value, and AUC were 96.1, 95.2, 96.9%, 0.961, and 0.99, respectively, with the correct diagnostic basis generated by Grad-CAM. In the controlled experiment, the diagnostic accuracy of the residents significantly improved when they used the CAD system. We developed a newly CAD system with a deep learning algorithm from a relatively large dataset from multiple institutions. Our system achieved high diagnostic performance. Our system improved the diagnostic accuracy of residents for hip fractures. Level III, Foundational evidence, before-after study. high.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Less experienced clinicians sometimes make misdiagnosis of hip fractures. We developed computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) system for hip fractures on plain X-rays using a deep learning model trained on a large dataset. In this study, we examined whether the accuracy of the diagnosis of hip fracture of the residents could be improved by using this system.
METHODS
METHODS
A deep convolutional neural network approach was used for machine learning. Pytorch 1.3 and Fast.ai 1.0 were applied as frameworks, and an EfficientNet-B4 model (a pre-trained ImageNet model) was used. We handled the 5295 X-rays from the patients with femoral neck fracture or femoral trochanteric fracture from 2009 to 2019. We excluded cases in which the bilateral hips were not included within an image range, and cases of femoral shaft fracture and periprosthetic fracture. Finally, we included 5242 AP pelvic X-rays from 4851 cases. We divided these 5242 images into two images per image, and prepared 5242 images including fracture site and 5242 images without fracture site. Thus, a total of 10,484 images were used for machine learning. The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, F-value, and area under the curve (AUC) were assessed. Gradient-weighted class activation mapping (Grad-CAM) was used to conceptualize the basis for the diagnosis of the fracture by the deep learning algorithm. Secondly, we conducted a controlled experiment with clinicians. Thirty-one residents;young doctors within 2 years of graduation from medical school who rotate through various specialties, were tested using 300 hip fracture images that were randomly extracted from the dataset. We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy with and without the use of the CAD system for each of the 300 images.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, F-value, and AUC were 96.1, 95.2, 96.9%, 0.961, and 0.99, respectively, with the correct diagnostic basis generated by Grad-CAM. In the controlled experiment, the diagnostic accuracy of the residents significantly improved when they used the CAD system.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
We developed a newly CAD system with a deep learning algorithm from a relatively large dataset from multiple institutions. Our system achieved high diagnostic performance. Our system improved the diagnostic accuracy of residents for hip fractures.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
METHODS
Level III, Foundational evidence, before-after study.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
CONCLUSIONS
high.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33941145
doi: 10.1186/s12891-021-04260-2
pii: 10.1186/s12891-021-04260-2
pmc: PMC8091525
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
407Références
J Am Coll Radiol. 2018 Mar;15(3 Pt B):512-520
pubmed: 29398494
BMC Emerg Med. 2006 Feb 16;6:4
pubmed: 16483365
J Emerg Med. 2009 Aug;37(2):144-52
pubmed: 18963720
JMIR Med Inform. 2020 Nov 27;8(11):e19416
pubmed: 33245279
Arch Osteoporos. 2009 Dec;4(1-2):71-77
pubmed: 20234789
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2000 Jul;39(7):745-8
pubmed: 10908693
Lancet Digit Health. 2019 Oct;1(6):e271-e297
pubmed: 33323251
J Bone Miner Metab. 2009;27(5):620-8
pubmed: 19568689
Nat Commun. 2021 Feb 16;12(1):1066
pubmed: 33594071
J Emerg Med. 2012 Aug;43(2):303-7
pubmed: 22459594
Acta Orthop. 2017 Dec;88(6):581-586
pubmed: 28681679
Osteoporos Int. 2004 Feb;15(2):87-94
pubmed: 14605799
Eur Radiol. 2019 Oct;29(10):5469-5477
pubmed: 30937588
Injury. 2005 Jul;36(7):858-61
pubmed: 15949488
J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2019 Feb;63(1):27-32
pubmed: 30407743
Acta Orthop. 2020 Dec;91(6):699-704
pubmed: 32783544
Acta Orthop. 2020 Apr;91(2):215-220
pubmed: 31928116
Am J Med. 2002 Jun 15;112(9):702-9
pubmed: 12079710
Skeletal Radiol. 2019 Feb;48(2):239-244
pubmed: 29955910
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2018 Jul 25;19(1):256
pubmed: 30045720
Int J Epidemiol. 2010 Aug;39(4):988-95
pubmed: 19749026
NPJ Digit Med. 2018 Mar 14;1:5
pubmed: 31304291
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001 Feb;176(2):317-22
pubmed: 11159064
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018 Nov 6;115(45):11591-11596
pubmed: 30348771
Bone Joint J. 2014 Sep;96-B(9):1178-84
pubmed: 25183587
BMJ Open. 2016 Nov 14;6(11):e012799
pubmed: 28137831
Acta Orthop Scand. 2002 Jun;73(3):307-10
pubmed: 12143978
Injury. 2016 Jun;47(6):1297-301
pubmed: 26993257
IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2016 May;35(5):1285-98
pubmed: 26886976
J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2013 Sep;75(3):387-90
pubmed: 24089109
Korean J Radiol. 2019 Mar;20(3):405-410
pubmed: 30799571