Validation of a deep learning model for traumatic brain injury detection and NIRIS grading on non-contrast CT: a multi-reader study with promising results and opportunities for improvement.


Journal

Neuroradiology
ISSN: 1432-1920
Titre abrégé: Neuroradiology
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 1302751

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Nov 2023
Historique:
received: 03 04 2023
accepted: 21 05 2023
medline: 23 10 2023
pubmed: 3 6 2023
entrez: 3 6 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

This study aimed to assess and externally validate the performance of a deep learning (DL) model for the interpretation of non-contrast computed tomography (NCCT) scans of patients with suspicion of traumatic brain injury (TBI). This retrospective and multi-reader study included patients with TBI suspicion who were transported to the emergency department and underwent NCCT scans. Eight reviewers, with varying levels of training and experience (two neuroradiology attendings, two neuroradiology fellows, two neuroradiology residents, one neurosurgery attending, and one neurosurgery resident), independently evaluated NCCT head scans. The same scans were evaluated using the version 5.0 of the DL model icobrain tbi. The establishment of the ground truth involved a thorough assessment of all accessible clinical and laboratory data, as well as follow-up imaging studies, including NCCT and magnetic resonance imaging, as a consensus amongst the study reviewers. The outcomes of interest included neuroimaging radiological interpretation system (NIRIS) scores, the presence of midline shift, mass effect, hemorrhagic lesions, hydrocephalus, and severe hydrocephalus, as well as measurements of midline shift and volumes of hemorrhagic lesions. Comparisons using weighted Cohen's kappa coefficient were made. The McNemar test was used to compare the diagnostic performance. Bland-Altman plots were used to compare measurements. One hundred patients were included, with the DL model successfully categorizing 77 scans. The median age for the total group was 48, with the omitted group having a median age of 44.5 and the included group having a median age of 48. The DL model demonstrated moderate agreement with the ground truth, trainees, and attendings. With the DL model's assistance, trainees' agreement with the ground truth improved. The DL model showed high specificity (0.88) and positive predictive value (0.96) in classifying NIRIS scores as 0-2 or 3-4. Trainees and attendings had the highest accuracy (0.95). The DL model's performance in classifying various TBI CT imaging common data elements was comparable to that of trainees and attendings. The average difference for the DL model in quantifying the volume of hemorrhagic lesions was 6.0 mL with a wide 95% confidence interval (CI) of - 68.32 to 80.22, and for midline shift, the average difference was 1.4 mm with a 95% CI of - 3.4 to 6.2. While the DL model outperformed trainees in some aspects, attendings' assessments remained superior in most instances. Using the DL model as an assistive tool benefited trainees, improving their NIRIS score agreement with the ground truth. Although the DL model showed high potential in classifying some TBI CT imaging common data elements, further refinement and optimization are necessary to enhance its clinical utility.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37269414
doi: 10.1007/s00234-023-03170-5
pii: 10.1007/s00234-023-03170-5
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

1605-1617

Informations de copyright

© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Références

GBD (2016) Traumatic Brain Injury and Spinal Cord Injury Collaborators (2019) Global, regional, and national burden of traumatic brain injury and spinal cord injury, 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet Neurol 18:56–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(18)30415-0
doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(18)30415-0
Dewan MC, Rattani A, Gupta S, et al (2019) Estimating the global incidence of traumatic brain injury. J Neurosurg 130:1080–1097.  https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.10.JNS17352
Multiple cause of death data on CDC WONDER. https://wonder.cdc.gov/mcd.html . Accessed 10 Jan 2023
Zaloshnja E, Miller T, Langlois JA, Selassie AW (2008) Prevalence of long-term disability from traumatic brain injury in the civilian population of the United States, 2005. J Head Trauma Rehabil 23:394–400. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.HTR.0000341435.52004.ac
doi: 10.1097/01.HTR.0000341435.52004.ac pubmed: 19033832
Schweitzer AD, Niogi SN, Whitlow CT, Tsiouris AJ (2019) Traumatic brain injury: imaging patterns and complications. Radiographics 39:1571–1595. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.2019190076
doi: 10.1148/rg.2019190076 pubmed: 31589576
Wintermark M, Li Y, Ding VY et al (2018) Neuroimaging radiological interpretation system for acute traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma 35:2665–2672. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2017.5311
doi: 10.1089/neu.2017.5311 pubmed: 29665763
Wintermark M, Sanelli PC, Anzai Y et al (2015) Imaging evidence and recommendations for traumatic brain injury: conventional neuroimaging techniques. J Am Coll Radiol 12:e1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2014.10.014
doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2014.10.014 pubmed: 25456317
Raj R, Siironen J, Skrifvars MB, et al (2014) Predicting outcome in traumatic brain injury: development of a novel computerized tomography classification system (Helsinki computerized tomography score). Neurosurgery 75:632–646; discussion 646–647. https://doi.org/10.1227/NEU.0000000000000533
Marshall LF, Marshall SB, Klauber MR et al (1991) A new classification of head injury based on computerized tomography. J Neurosurg 75:S14–S20. https://doi.org/10.3171/sup.1991.75.1s.0s14
doi: 10.3171/sup.1991.75.1s.0s14
Maas AIR, Hukkelhoven CWPM, Marshall LF, Steyerberg EW (2005) Prediction of outcome in traumatic brain injury with computed tomographic characteristics: a comparison between the computed tomographic classification and combinations of computed tomographic predictors. Neurosurgery 57:1173–1182; discussion 1173–1182. https://doi.org/10.1227/01.neu.0000186013.63046.6b
Grewal M, Srivastava MM, Kumar P, Varadarajan S (2017) RADNET: Radiologist level accuracy using deep learning for HEMORRHAGE detection in CT Scans. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.1710.04934
Lin E, Yuh EL (2022) Computational approaches for acute traumatic brain injury image recognition. Front Neurol 13:791816. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2022.791816
doi: 10.3389/fneur.2022.791816 pubmed: 35370919 pmcid: 8964403
Vande Vyvere T, Wilms G, Claes L et al (2019) Central versus local radiological reading of acute computed tomography characteristics in multi-center traumatic brain injury research. J Neurotrauma 36:1080–1092. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2018.6061
doi: 10.1089/neu.2018.6061 pubmed: 30259789
Lin X, Yan Z, Kuang Z et al (2022) Fracture R-CNN: An anchor-efficient anti-interference framework for skull fracture detection in CT images. Med Phys 49:7179–7192. https://doi.org/10.1002/mp.15809
doi: 10.1002/mp.15809 pubmed: 35713606
Yao H, Williamson C, Gryak J, Najarian K (2020) Automated hematoma segmentation and outcome prediction for patients with traumatic brain injury. Artif Intell Med 107:101910. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artmed.2020.101910
doi: 10.1016/j.artmed.2020.101910 pubmed: 32828449
Radiology facing a global shortage. https://www.rsna.org/news/2022/may/Global-Radiologist-Shortage . Accessed 18 Nov 2022
Inkeaw P, Angkurawaranon S, Khumrin P et al (2022) Automatic hemorrhage segmentation on head CT scan for traumatic brain injury using 3D deep learning model. Comput Biol Med 146:105530. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2022.105530
doi: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2022.105530 pubmed: 35460962
Monteiro M, Newcombe VFJ, Mathieu F et al (2020) Multiclass semantic segmentation and quantification of traumatic brain injury lesions on head CT using deep learning: an algorithm development and multicentre validation study. Lancet Digit Health 2:e314–e322. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2589-7500(20)30085-6
doi: 10.1016/S2589-7500(20)30085-6 pubmed: 33328125
Pease M, Arefan D, Barber J et al (2022) Outcome prediction in patients with severe traumatic brain injury using deep learning from head CT scans. Radiology 304:385–394. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.212181
doi: 10.1148/radiol.212181 pubmed: 35471108
Remedios S, Roy S, Blaber J et al (2019) Distributed deep learning for robust multi-site segmentation of CT imaging after traumatic brain injury. Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng 10949:109490A. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2511997
doi: 10.1117/12.2511997 pubmed: 31602089 pmcid: 6786776
Rudin C (2019) Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead. Nat Mach Intell 1:206–215. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0048-x
doi: 10.1038/s42256-019-0048-x pubmed: 35603010 pmcid: 9122117
Karabacak M, Ozkara BB, Mordag S, Bisdas S (2022) Deep learning for prediction of isocitrate dehydrogenase mutation in gliomas: a critical approach, systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic test performance using a Bayesian approach. Quant Imaging Med Surg 12:4033–4046. https://doi.org/10.21037/qims-22-34
doi: 10.21037/qims-22-34 pubmed: 35919062 pmcid: 9338374
Zhou B, Ding VY, Li Y et al (2019) Validation of the neuroimaging radiological interpretation system for acute traumatic brain injury. J Comput Assist Tomogr 43:690–696. https://doi.org/10.1097/RCT.0000000000000913
doi: 10.1097/RCT.0000000000000913 pubmed: 31490891
Creeden S, Ding VY, Parker JJ et al (2020) Interobserver agreement for the computed tomography severity grading scales for acute traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma 37:1445–1451. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2019.6871
doi: 10.1089/neu.2019.6871 pubmed: 31996087
Haacke EM, Duhaime AC, Gean AD et al (2010) Common data elements in radiologic imaging of traumatic brain injury. J Magn Reson Imaging 32:516–543. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.22259
doi: 10.1002/jmri.22259 pubmed: 20815050
Kwak R, Kadoya S, Suzuki T (1983) Factors affecting the prognosis in thalamic hemorrhage. Stroke 14:493–500. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.str.14.4.493
doi: 10.1161/01.str.14.4.493 pubmed: 6606870
Jain S, Vyvere TV, Terzopoulos V et al (2019) Automatic quantification of computed tomography features in acute traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma 36:1794–1803. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2018.6183
doi: 10.1089/neu.2018.6183 pubmed: 30648469 pmcid: 6551991
Zeiler MD (2012) ADADELTA: An adaptive learning rate method. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.1212.5701
Modat M, Ridgway GR, Taylor ZA et al (2010) Fast free-form deformation using graphics processing units. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 98:278–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2009.09.002
doi: 10.1016/j.cmpb.2009.09.002 pubmed: 19818524
Çiçek Ö, Abdulkadir A, Lienkamp SS, et al (2016) 3D U-Net: Learning dense volumetric segmentation from sparse annotation. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.1606.06650
McHugh ML (2012) Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic. Biochem Med (Zagreb) 22:276–282
doi: 10.11613/BM.2012.031 pubmed: 23092060
Parizel PM, Kremling J, Janssen C, et al (2015) Radiologic imaging of sports-induced brain injuries. In: Glaudemans AWJM, Dierckx RAJO, Gielen JLMA, Zwerver J (Hans) (eds) Nuclear medicine and radiologic imaging in sports injuries. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 147–170
Yuh EL, Mukherjee P, Lingsma HF et al (2013) Magnetic resonance imaging improves 3-month outcome prediction in mild traumatic brain injury. Ann Neurol 73:224–235. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.23783
doi: 10.1002/ana.23783 pubmed: 23224915
Quon JL, Han M, Kim LH et al (2020) Artificial intelligence for automatic cerebral ventricle segmentation and volume calculation: a clinical tool for the evaluation of pediatric hydrocephalus. J Neurosurg Pediatr 27:131–138. https://doi.org/10.3171/2020.6.PEDS20251
doi: 10.3171/2020.6.PEDS20251 pubmed: 33260138 pmcid: 9707365
Klimont M, Flieger M, Rzeszutek J et al (2019) Automated ventricular system segmentation in paediatric patients treated for hydrocephalus using deep learning methods. Biomed Res Int 2019:3059170. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/3059170
doi: 10.1155/2019/3059170 pubmed: 31360710 pmcid: 6642766
Kok YE, Pszczolkowski S, Law ZK et al (2022) Semantic segmentation of spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage, intraventricular hemorrhage, and associated edema on CT images using deep learning. Radiol Artif Intell 4:e220096. https://doi.org/10.1148/ryai.220096
doi: 10.1148/ryai.220096 pubmed: 36523645 pmcid: 9745441
Peng Q, Chen X, Zhang C et al (2022) Deep learning-based computed tomography image segmentation and volume measurement of intracerebral hemorrhage. Front Neurosci 16:965680. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2022.965680
doi: 10.3389/fnins.2022.965680 pubmed: 36263364 pmcid: 9575984
Kim CH, Hahm MH, Lee DE et al (2021) Clinical usefulness of deep learning-based automated segmentation in intracranial hemorrhage. Technol Health Care 29:881–895. https://doi.org/10.3233/THC-202533
doi: 10.3233/THC-202533 pubmed: 33682736
Farzaneh N, Williamson CA, Jiang C et al (2020) Automated segmentation and severity analysis of subdural hematoma for patients with traumatic brain injuries. Diagnostics (Basel) 10:773. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics10100773
doi: 10.3390/diagnostics10100773 pubmed: 33007929
L L, M W, B L, et al (2021) Deep learning for hemorrhagic lesion detection and segmentation on brain CT images. IEEE J Biomed Health Informa 25. https://doi.org/10.1109/JBHI.2020.3028243
Dhar R, Falcone GJ, Chen Y et al (2020) Deep learning for automated measurement of hemorrhage and perihematomal edema in supratentorial intracerebral hemorrhage. Stroke 51:648–651. https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.119.027657
doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.119.027657 pubmed: 31805845
Chilamkurthy S, Ghosh R, Tanamala S et al (2018) Deep learning algorithms for detection of critical findings in head CT scans: a retrospective study. Lancet 392:2388–2396. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31645-3
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31645-3 pubmed: 30318264
Phaphuangwittayakul A, Guo Y, Ying F et al (2022) An optimal deep learning framework for multi-type hemorrhagic lesions detection and quantification in head CT images for traumatic brain injury. Appl Intell (Dordr) 52:7320–7338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-021-02782-9
doi: 10.1007/s10489-021-02782-9 pubmed: 34764620

Auteurs

Bin Jiang (B)

Department of Radiology, Neuroradiology Division, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

Burak Berksu Ozkara (BB)

Department of Neuroradiology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.

Sean Creeden (S)

Deparment of Neuroradiology, University of Illinois College of Medicine Peoria, Peoria, IL, USA.

Guangming Zhu (G)

Department of Neurology, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA.

Victoria Y Ding (VY)

Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

Hui Chen (H)

Department of Neuroradiology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.

Bryan Lanzman (B)

Department of Radiology, Neuroradiology Division, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

Dylan Wolman (D)

Department of Neuroimaging and Neurointervention, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

Sara Shams (S)

Department of Radiology, Neuroradiology Division, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Department of Radiology, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Institution for Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.

Austin Trinh (A)

Department of Neuroimaging and Neurointervention, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

Ying Li (Y)

Department of Radiology, Neuroradiology Division, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

Alexander Khalaf (A)

Department of Neuroimaging and Neurointervention, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

Jonathon J Parker (JJ)

Device-Based Neuroelectronics Laboratory, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Department of Neurological Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA.

Casey H Halpern (CH)

Department of Neurosurgery, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Department of Surgery, Corporal Michael J. Crescenz Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Max Wintermark (M)

Department of Neuroradiology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. max.wintermark@gmail.com.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH