High-accuracy detection of supraspinatus fatty infiltration in shoulder MRI using convolutional neural network algorithms

Le résumé fourni par la source

Background: The supraspinatus muscle fatty infiltration (SMFI) is a crucial MRI shoulder finding to determine the patient's prognosis. Clinicians have used the Goutallier classification to diagnose it. Deep learning algorithms have been demonstrated to have higher accuracy than traditional methods. Aim: To train convolutional neural network models to categorize the SMFI as a binary diagnosis based on Goutallier's classification using shoulder MRIs. Methods: A retrospective study was performed. MRI and medical records from patients with SMFI diagnosis from January 1st, 2019, to September 20th, 2020, were selected. 900 T2-weighted, Y-view shoulder MRIs were evaluated. The supraspinatus fossa was automatically cropped using segmentation masks. A balancing technique was implemented. Five binary classification classes were developed into two as follows, A: 0, 1 v/s 3, 4; B: 0, 1 v/s 2, 3, 4; C: 0, 1 v/s 2; D: 0, 1, 2, v/s 3, 4; E: 2 v/s 3, 4. The VGG-19, ResNet-50, and Inception-v3 architectures were trained as backbone classifiers. An average of three 10-fold cross-validation processes were developed to evaluate model performance. AU-ROC, sensitivity, and specificity with 95% confidence intervals were used. Results: Overall, 606 shoulders MRIs were analyzed. The Goutallier distribution was presented as follows: 0 = 403; 1 = 114; 2 = 51; 3 = 24; 4 = 14. Case A, VGG-19 model demonstrated an AU-ROC of 0.991 ± 0.003 (accuracy, 0.973 ± 0.006; sensitivity, 0.947 ± 0.039; specificity, 0.975 ± 0.006). B, VGG-19, 0.961 ± 0.013 (0.925 ± 0.010; 0.847 ± 0.041; 0.939 ± 0.011). C, VGG-19, 0.935 ± 0.022 (0.900 ± 0.015; 0.750 ± 0.078; 0.914 ± 0.014). D, VGG-19, 0.977 ± 0.007 (0.942 ± 0.012; 0.925 ± 0.056; 0.942 ± 0.013). E, VGG-19, 0.861 ± 0.050 (0.779 ± 0.054; 0.706 ± 0.088; 0.831 ± 0.061). Conclusion: Convolutional neural network models demonstrated high accuracy in MRIs SMFI diagnosis.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.