13
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Deep convolutional neural network-based detection of meniscus tears: comparison with radiologists and surgery as standard of reference

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective

          To clinically validate a fully automated deep convolutional neural network (DCNN) for detection of surgically proven meniscus tears.

          Materials and methods

          One hundred consecutive patients were retrospectively included, who underwent knee MRI and knee arthroscopy in our institution. All MRI were evaluated for medial and lateral meniscus tears by two musculoskeletal radiologists independently and by DCNN. Included patients were not part of the training set of the DCNN. Surgical reports served as the standard of reference. Statistics included sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, ROC curve analysis, and kappa statistics.

          Results

          Fifty-seven percent (57/100) of patients had a tear of the medial and 24% (24/100) of the lateral meniscus, including 12% (12/100) with a tear of both menisci. For medial meniscus tear detection, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were for reader 1: 93%, 91%, and 92%, for reader 2: 96%, 86%, and 92%, and for the DCNN: 84%, 88%, and 86%. For lateral meniscus tear detection, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were for reader 1: 71%, 95%, and 89%, for reader 2: 67%, 99%, and 91%, and for the DCNN: 58%, 92%, and 84%. Sensitivity for medial meniscus tears was significantly different between reader 2 and the DCNN ( p = 0.039), and no significant differences existed for all other comparisons (all p ≥ 0.092). The AUC-ROC of the DCNN was 0.882, 0.781, and 0.961 for detection of medial, lateral, and overall meniscus tear. Inter-reader agreement was very good for the medial (kappa = 0.876) and good for the lateral meniscus (kappa = 0.741).

          Conclusion

          DCNN-based meniscus tear detection can be performed in a fully automated manner with a similar specificity but a lower sensitivity in comparison with musculoskeletal radiologists.

          Related collections

          Most cited references31

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Machine learning and radiology.

          In this paper, we give a short introduction to machine learning and survey its applications in radiology. We focused on six categories of applications in radiology: medical image segmentation, registration, computer aided detection and diagnosis, brain function or activity analysis and neurological disease diagnosis from fMR images, content-based image retrieval systems for CT or MRI images, and text analysis of radiology reports using natural language processing (NLP) and natural language understanding (NLU). This survey shows that machine learning plays a key role in many radiology applications. Machine learning identifies complex patterns automatically and helps radiologists make intelligent decisions on radiology data such as conventional radiographs, CT, MRI, and PET images and radiology reports. In many applications, the performance of machine learning-based automatic detection and diagnosis systems has shown to be comparable to that of a well-trained and experienced radiologist. Technology development in machine learning and radiology will benefit from each other in the long run. Key contributions and common characteristics of machine learning techniques in radiology are discussed. We also discuss the problem of translating machine learning applications to the radiology clinical setting, including advantages and potential barriers. Copyright © 2012. Published by Elsevier B.V.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Deep-learning-assisted diagnosis for knee magnetic resonance imaging: Development and retrospective validation of MRNet

            Background Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the knee is the preferred method for diagnosing knee injuries. However, interpretation of knee MRI is time-intensive and subject to diagnostic error and variability. An automated system for interpreting knee MRI could prioritize high-risk patients and assist clinicians in making diagnoses. Deep learning methods, in being able to automatically learn layers of features, are well suited for modeling the complex relationships between medical images and their interpretations. In this study we developed a deep learning model for detecting general abnormalities and specific diagnoses (anterior cruciate ligament [ACL] tears and meniscal tears) on knee MRI exams. We then measured the effect of providing the model’s predictions to clinical experts during interpretation. Methods and findings Our dataset consisted of 1,370 knee MRI exams performed at Stanford University Medical Center between January 1, 2001, and December 31, 2012 (mean age 38.0 years; 569 [41.5%] female patients). The majority vote of 3 musculoskeletal radiologists established reference standard labels on an internal validation set of 120 exams. We developed MRNet, a convolutional neural network for classifying MRI series and combined predictions from 3 series per exam using logistic regression. In detecting abnormalities, ACL tears, and meniscal tears, this model achieved area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) values of 0.937 (95% CI 0.895, 0.980), 0.965 (95% CI 0.938, 0.993), and 0.847 (95% CI 0.780, 0.914), respectively, on the internal validation set. We also obtained a public dataset of 917 exams with sagittal T1-weighted series and labels for ACL injury from Clinical Hospital Centre Rijeka, Croatia. On the external validation set of 183 exams, the MRNet trained on Stanford sagittal T2-weighted series achieved an AUC of 0.824 (95% CI 0.757, 0.892) in the detection of ACL injuries with no additional training, while an MRNet trained on the rest of the external data achieved an AUC of 0.911 (95% CI 0.864, 0.958). We additionally measured the specificity, sensitivity, and accuracy of 9 clinical experts (7 board-certified general radiologists and 2 orthopedic surgeons) on the internal validation set both with and without model assistance. Using a 2-sided Pearson’s chi-squared test with adjustment for multiple comparisons, we found no significant differences between the performance of the model and that of unassisted general radiologists in detecting abnormalities. General radiologists achieved significantly higher sensitivity in detecting ACL tears (p-value = 0.002; q-value = 0.019) and significantly higher specificity in detecting meniscal tears (p-value = 0.003; q-value = 0.019). Using a 1-tailed t test on the change in performance metrics, we found that providing model predictions significantly increased clinical experts’ specificity in identifying ACL tears (p-value < 0.001; q-value = 0.006). The primary limitations of our study include lack of surgical ground truth and the small size of the panel of clinical experts. Conclusions Our deep learning model can rapidly generate accurate clinical pathology classifications of knee MRI exams from both internal and external datasets. Moreover, our results support the assertion that deep learning models can improve the performance of clinical experts during medical imaging interpretation. Further research is needed to validate the model prospectively and to determine its utility in the clinical setting.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Artificial intelligence for analyzing orthopedic trauma radiographs

              Background and purpose — Recent advances in artificial intelligence (deep learning) have shown remarkable performance in classifying non-medical images, and the technology is believed to be the next technological revolution. So far it has never been applied in an orthopedic setting, and in this study we sought to determine the feasibility of using deep learning for skeletal radiographs. Methods — We extracted 256,000 wrist, hand, and ankle radiographs from Danderyd’s Hospital and identified 4 classes: fracture, laterality, body part, and exam view. We then selected 5 openly available deep learning networks that were adapted for these images. The most accurate network was benchmarked against a gold standard for fractures. We furthermore compared the network’s performance with 2 senior orthopedic surgeons who reviewed images at the same resolution as the network. Results — All networks exhibited an accuracy of at least 90% when identifying laterality, body part, and exam view. The final accuracy for fractures was estimated at 83% for the best performing network. The network performed similarly to senior orthopedic surgeons when presented with images at the same resolution as the network. The 2 reviewer Cohen’s kappa under these conditions was 0.76. Interpretation — This study supports the use for orthopedic radiographs of artificial intelligence, which can perform at a human level. While current implementation lacks important features that surgeons require, e.g. risk of dislocation, classifications, measurements, and combining multiple exam views, these problems have technical solutions that are waiting to be implemented for orthopedics.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                benjamin.fritz@balgrist.ch
                Journal
                Skeletal Radiol
                Skeletal Radiol
                Skeletal Radiology
                Springer Berlin Heidelberg (Berlin/Heidelberg )
                0364-2348
                1432-2161
                13 March 2020
                13 March 2020
                2020
                : 49
                : 8
                : 1207-1217
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.412373.0, ISNI 0000 0004 0518 9682, Department of Radiology, , Balgrist University Hospital, ; Forchstrasse 340, CH-8008 Zurich, Switzerland
                [2 ]GRID grid.7400.3, ISNI 0000 0004 1937 0650, Faculty of Medicine, , University of Zurich, ; Zurich, Switzerland
                [3 ]Balzano Informatik AG, Zurich, Switzerland
                [4 ]GRID grid.412373.0, ISNI 0000 0004 0518 9682, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, , Balgrist University Hospital, ; Zurich, Switzerland
                Article
                3410
                10.1007/s00256-020-03410-2
                7299917
                32170334
                857005be-884f-4b81-9c3d-e614f90cb0be
                © The Author(s) 2020, corrected publication 2020

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 28 November 2019
                : 11 February 2020
                : 1 March 2020
                Categories
                Scientific Article
                Custom metadata
                © ISS 2020

                Radiology & Imaging
                artificial intelligence,neural networks (computer),tibial meniscus injuries,data accuracy,magnetic resonance imaging

                Comments

                Comment on this article