Multidimensional Deep Learning Reduces False-Positives in the Automated Detection of Cerebral Aneurysms on Time-Of-Flight Magnetic Resonance Angiography: A Multi-Center Study.

autodetection cerebral aneurysm deep learning false positive magnetic resonance angiography multidimensional convolutional neural network

Journal

Frontiers in neurology
ISSN: 1664-2295
Titre abrégé: Front Neurol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101546899

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2021
Historique:
received: 23 09 2021
accepted: 07 12 2021
entrez: 4 2 2022
pubmed: 5 2 2022
medline: 5 2 2022
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Current deep learning-based cerebral aneurysm detection demonstrates high sensitivity, but produces numerous false-positives (FPs), which hampers clinical application of automated detection systems for time-of-flight magnetic resonance angiography. To reduce FPs while maintaining high sensitivity, we developed a multidimensional convolutional neural network (MD-CNN) designed to unite planar and stereoscopic information about aneurysms. This retrospective study enrolled time-of-flight magnetic resonance angiography images of cerebral aneurysms from three institutions from June 2006 to April 2019. In the internal test, 80% of the entire data set was used for model training and 20% for the test, while for the external tests, data from different pairs of the three institutions were used for training and the remaining one for testing. Images containing aneurysms > 15 mm and images without aneurysms were excluded. Three deep learning models [planar information-only (2D-CNN), stereoscopic information-only (3D-CNN), and multidimensional information (MD-CNN)] were trained to classify whether the voxels contained aneurysms, and they were evaluated on each test. The performance of each model was assessed using free-response operating characteristic curves. In total, 732 aneurysms (5.9 ± 2.5 mm) of 559 cases (327, 120, and 112 from institutes A, B, and C; 469 and 263 for 1.5T and 3.0T MRI) were included in this study. In the internal test, the highest sensitivities were 80.4, 87.4, and 82.5%, and the FPs were 6.1, 7.1, and 5.0 FPs/case at a fixed sensitivity of 80% for the 2D-CNN, 3D-CNN, and MD-CNN, respectively. In the external test, the highest sensitivities were 82.1, 86.5, and 89.1%, and 5.9, 7.4, and 4.2 FPs/cases for them, respectively. MD-CNN was a new approach to maintain sensitivity and reduce the FPs simultaneously.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35115991
doi: 10.3389/fneur.2021.742126
pmc: PMC8805516
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

742126

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2022 Terasaki, Yokota, Tashiro, Maejima, Takeuchi, Kurosawa, Yamauchi, Takada, Mukai, Ohira, Ota, Horikoshi, Mori, Uno and Suyari.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

YT is employed by ZOZO Technologies, Inc. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Références

AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2019 Jan;40(1):25-32
pubmed: 30573461
Radiology. 2019 Jan;290(1):187-194
pubmed: 30351253
Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2020 Apr;15(4):715-723
pubmed: 32056126
J Neuroophthalmol. 2011 Jun;31(2):103-9
pubmed: 21150642
Lancet Neurol. 2011 Jul;10(7):626-36
pubmed: 21641282
Neural Netw. 2019 Jul;115:1-10
pubmed: 30909118
Med Phys. 2003 Aug;30(8):2040-51
pubmed: 12945970
Med Phys. 2018 May;45(5):2097-2107
pubmed: 29500816
IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2016 May;35(5):1160-1169
pubmed: 26955024
Med Phys. 2006 Feb;33(2):394-401
pubmed: 16532946
J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2014 Jul;30(3):328-37
pubmed: 25190938
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2018 Apr;47(4):948-953
pubmed: 28836310
J Digit Imaging. 2019 Oct;32(5):808-815
pubmed: 30511281
Stroke. 2014 Jan;45(1):119-26
pubmed: 24326447
Emerg Radiol. 2010 Jan;17(1):45-50
pubmed: 19499257
J Digit Imaging. 2011 Feb;24(1):86-95
pubmed: 19937083
Med Phys. 2020 Jun;47(5):2150-2160
pubmed: 32030769
JAMA Netw Open. 2019 Jun 5;2(6):e195600
pubmed: 31173130
Neurosurgery. 2008 May;62(5):1033-8; discussion 1038-9
pubmed: 18580800
Acad Radiol. 2004 Oct;11(10):1093-104
pubmed: 15530802
Acad Radiol. 2005 Feb;12(2):191-201
pubmed: 15721596
Eur Radiol. 2020 Nov;30(11):5785-5793
pubmed: 32474633
Clin Neuroradiol. 2020 Sep;30(3):591-598
pubmed: 31227844
IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2017 Jul;64(7):1558-1567
pubmed: 28113302

Auteurs

Yuki Terasaki (Y)

Graduate School of Science and Engineering, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan.
Department of EC Platform, ZOZO Technologies, Inc., Tokyo, Japan.

Hajime Yokota (H)

Department of Diagnostic Radiology and Radiation Oncology, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan.

Kohei Tashiro (K)

Graduate School of Science and Engineering, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan.

Takuma Maejima (T)

Department of Radiology, Chiba University Hospital, Chiba, Japan.

Takashi Takeuchi (T)

Department of Radiology, Chiba University Hospital, Chiba, Japan.

Ryuna Kurosawa (R)

Department of Radiology, Chiba University Hospital, Chiba, Japan.

Shoma Yamauchi (S)

Department of Radiology, Chiba University Hospital, Chiba, Japan.

Akiyo Takada (A)

Department of Radiology, Chiba University Hospital, Chiba, Japan.

Hiroki Mukai (H)

Department of Radiology, Chiba University Hospital, Chiba, Japan.

Kenji Ohira (K)

Department of Radiology, Chiba University Hospital, Chiba, Japan.

Joji Ota (J)

Department of Radiology, Chiba University Hospital, Chiba, Japan.

Takuro Horikoshi (T)

Department of Radiology, Chiba University Hospital, Chiba, Japan.

Yasukuni Mori (Y)

Graduate School of Engineering, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan.

Takashi Uno (T)

Department of Diagnostic Radiology and Radiation Oncology, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan.

Hiroki Suyari (H)

Graduate School of Engineering, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan.

Classifications MeSH