Diagnostic performance evaluation of a computer-aided simple triage system for coronary CT angiography in patients with intermediate risk for acute coronary syndrome

Automated Identification of Coronary Arteries in Assisting Inexperienced Readers: Comparison between Two Commercial Vendors

Background: to assess the performance and speed of two commercially available advanced cardiac software packages in the automated identification of coronary vessels as an aiding tool for inexperienced readers. Methods: Hundred and sixty patients undergoing coronary CT angiography (CCTA) were prospectively enrolled from February until September 2021 and randomized in two groups, each one composed by 80 patients. Patients in group 1 were scanned on Revolution EVO CT Scanner (GE Healthcare), while patients in group 2 had the CCTA performed on Brilliance iCT (Philips Healthcare); each examination was evaluated on the respective vendor proprietary advanced cardiac software (software 1 and 2, respectively). Two inexperienced readers in cardiac imaging verified the software performance in the automated identification of the three major coronary vessels: (RCA, LCx, and LAD) and in the number of identified coronary segments. Time of analysis was also recorded. Results: software 1 correctly and automatically nominated 202/240 (84.2%) of the three main coronary vessels, while software 2 correctly identified 191/240 (79.6%) (p = 0.191). Software 1 achieved greater performances in recognizing the LCx (81.2% versus 67.5%; p = 0.048), while no differences have been reported in detecting the RCA (p = 0.679), and the LAD (p = 0.618). On a per-segment analysis, software 1 outperformed software 2, automatically detecting 942/1062 (88.7%) coronary segments, while software 2 detected 797/1078 (73.9%) (p < 0.001). Average reconstruction and detection time was of 13.8 s for software 1 and 21.9 s for software 2 (p < 0.001). Conclusions: automated cardiac software packages are a reliable and time-saving tool for inexperienced reader. Software 1 outperforms software 2 and might therefore better assist inexperienced CCTA readers in automated identification of the three main vessels and coronaries segments, with a consistent time saving of the reading session.

Do plaque-related factors affect the diagnostic performance of an artificial intelligence coronary-assisted diagnosis system? Comparison with invasive coronary angiography

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of plaque-related factors on the diagnostic performance of an artificial intelligence coronary-assisted diagnosis system (AI-CADS).

METHODS

Patients who underwent coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) and invasive coronary angiography (ICA) were retrospectively included in this study. The degree of stenosis in each vessel was collected from CCTA and ICA, and the information on plaque-related factors (plaque length, plaque type, and coronary artery calcium score (CAC)) of the vessels with plaques was collected from CCTA.

RESULTS

In total, 1224 vessels in 306 patients (166 men; 65.7 ± 10.1 years) were analyzed. Of these, 391 vessels in 249 patients showed significant stenosis using ICA as the gold standard. Using per-vessel as the unit, the area under the curves of coronary stenosis ≥ 50% for AI-CADS, doctor, and AI-CADS + doctor was 0.764, 0.837, and 0.853, respectively. The accuracies in interpreting the degree of coronary stenosis were 56.0%, 68.1%, and 71.2%, respectively. Seven hundred fifty vessels showed plaques on CCTA; plaque type did not affect the interpretation results by AI-CADS (chi-square test: p = 0.0093; multiple logistic regression: p = 0.4937). However, the interpretation results for plaque length (chi-square test: p < 0.0001; multiple logistic regression: p = 0.0061) and CACs (chi-square test: p < 0.0001; multiple logistic regression: p = 0.0001) were significantly different.

CONCLUSION

AI-CADS has an ability to distinguish ≥ 50% coronary stenosis, but additional manual interpretation based on AI-CADS is necessary. The plaque length and CACs will affect the diagnostic performance of AI-CADS.

KEY POINTS

• AI-CADS can help radiologists quickly assess CCTA and improve diagnostic confidence. • Additional manual interpretation on the basis of AI-CADS is necessary. • The plaque length and CACs will affect the diagnostic performance of AI-CADS.

Evaluation of novice reader diagnostic performance in coronary CT angiography using an advanced cardiac software package

Purpose

The purpose of this research was to evaluate whether a commercially available advanced cardiac software package for coronary CT angiography (CTA) interpretation may reliably assist inexperienced readers to screen for significant coronary artery stenoses.

Methods

Coronary CTA data sets of 61 consecutive patients with suspected coronary artery disease were evaluated by three novice readers with no experience in cardiac CT interpretation. In the first 15 patients, the novice readers were trained to use the advanced cardiac software package (includes automatic detection of coronary vessels, curved MPR and VRT reconstructions and a measurement too) knowing the results of an expert read. In the next 46 patients, the novice readers had to state whether there is a significant coronary artery stenosis (\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$>$$\end{document}>50 %) and if they are confident with their diagnosis. The results of the novice readers were compared to the expert read.

Results

The 46 coronary CTA data sets contained 184 vessels with 15 stenoses in 9 patients. On a per-vessel analysis, novice reader 1/2/3 demonstrated 60 %/100 %/ 93% sensitivity, and 98 %/90 %/86 % specificity. Per patient, the readers diagnosed 36/28/29 cases correctly as free of stenoses, 6/9/8 correctly as having at least one stenosis, missed 3/0/1 cases with a stenosis and overdiagnosed 1/9/8 patients. Cohen’s kappa values for the three readers versus the expert were 0.60, 0.61 and 0.54. The three novice readers felt confident in the diagnosis of 36/33/30 patients. In these patients, they missed one significant stenosis, showed a sensitivity of 100 %/100 %/75 % and a specificity of 100 %/92 %/88 %.

Conclusions

The evaluated advanced cardiac software package successfully assists novice readers in interpreting coronary CTA data sets especially in ruling out significant coronary artery stenosis.