Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1 -- 2466 2022-07-22 03:00:00 |
2 format correct Meta information modification 2466 2022-07-22 03:01:17 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?

Confirm

Are you sure to Delete?
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Koulaouzidis, G.;  Jadczyk, T.;  Iakovidis, D.K.;  Koulaouzidis, A.;  Bisnaire, M.;  Charisopoulou, D. Artificial Intelligence in Cardiology. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/25421 (accessed on 16 June 2024).
Koulaouzidis G,  Jadczyk T,  Iakovidis DK,  Koulaouzidis A,  Bisnaire M,  Charisopoulou D. Artificial Intelligence in Cardiology. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/25421. Accessed June 16, 2024.
Koulaouzidis, George, Tomasz Jadczyk, Dimitris K. Iakovidis, Anastasios Koulaouzidis, Marc Bisnaire, Dafni Charisopoulou. "Artificial Intelligence in Cardiology" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/25421 (accessed June 16, 2024).
Koulaouzidis, G.,  Jadczyk, T.,  Iakovidis, D.K.,  Koulaouzidis, A.,  Bisnaire, M., & Charisopoulou, D. (2022, July 22). Artificial Intelligence in Cardiology. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/25421
Koulaouzidis, George, et al. "Artificial Intelligence in Cardiology." Encyclopedia. Web. 22 July, 2022.
Artificial Intelligence in Cardiology
Edit

Artificial intelligence (AI) is an integral part of clinical decision support systems (CDSS), offering methods to approximate human reasoning and computationally infer decisions. AI is currently being investigated in several cardiology domains, from clinical decision support systems (CDSS) to imaging interpretation.

artificial intelligence cardiology heart failure

1. AI in Echocardiography

One of the first applications of AI in echocardiography was the assessment of left ventricular (LV) volume and function with automated quantification. AI may improve imaging quality—and thereby scan and dose time—and assist in segmentation, processing, and analysis. In 2015, Knackstedt et al. used a computer vision vendor-independent software in 255 patients; the software applies a machine-learning algorithm for measuring ejection fraction (EF) and longitudinal strain (LS) from biplane views of the left ventricle [1]. The EF and LS measurements were feasible in 98% of studies, and the average analysis time was 8 ± 1 s/patient, while a 92.1% accuracy was seen compared with the manually traced reference. A year later, Narula et al. investigated the diagnostic value of an ML framework that incorporates speckle-tracking echocardiographic data for automated discrimination of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) from physiological hypertrophy seen in athletes [2]. In a cohort of 77 athletes and 62 HCM subjects, the sensitivity and the specificity were 87% and 82%, respectively, for the differential diagnosis between HCM and physiologic hypertrophy.
Moreover, Zhang et al. used 14,035 echocardiograms performed over ten years to train CNN models for multiple tasks, including automated identification of 23 viewpoints, segmentation of cardiac chambers across five standard views, quantify chamber volumes, LV mass, LV EF and facilitate automatic determination of longitudinal strain through speckle tracking [3]. Automated measurements were comparable (or even superior) to manual ones. Finally, models were developed to detect hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, cardiac amyloidosis, and pulmonary arterial hypertension with C-statistics of 0.93, 0.87, and 0.85, respectively.
Furthermore, some AI models may aid in assessing valvular heart disease. For example, Moghaddasi et al. showed in a cohort of 139 subjects that a Support Vector Machine(SVM) (supervised ML model) classifier had a 99.38% sensitivity and 99.63% specificity to detect severe mitral regurgitation (MR) [4]. Specifically, an accuracy of 99.52%, 99.38%, 99.31%, and 99.59% was recorded to detect normal mitral valve, mild, moderate, and severe MR, respectively. In a proof-of-concept study, Playford et al. used data from 530,871 deidentified echocardiograms derived from 171,571 men and 158,404 women linked to a median of 4.1 years of follow-up to develop an AI system for the assessment of the severity of aortic stenosis (AS) [5]. The AI correctly identified 95.3% of patients with traditional high gradient AS versus 73.9% for the continuity equation. The entire phenotype evaluation obtained the severity of aortic stenosis without reference to LV outflow track velocity or dimension. The algorithm performed equally well in normal and impaired LV systolic function and low-flow and low-gradient severe AS.

2. AI in Cardiac/Coronary Computer Tomography (CCT)

The coronary artery calcium (CAC) score is a relatively new technique for coronary atherosclerosis identification and risk stratification. The amount of CAC volume can be quantified using the Agatston scoring method when applied to non-contrast ECG-gated coronary CT images [6]. However, image quality can be deteriorated by image noise, motion artifacts, or blooming artifacts from extensively calcified vessels or devices. In addition, the CAC scoring process is often a time-consuming one, making it an ideal candidate for time-saving AI applications. Wolterink et al. proposed an algorithm based on supervised learning to directly identify and quantify coronary artery calcification (CAC) in CCTA without initial coronary artery tree extraction [7]. This study included cardiac CT exams of 250 consecutively scanned patients. The proposed algorithm aimed the automatic CAC quantification in CCTA, reaching a sensitivity of 72%.
Recently, Martin et al. evaluated a novel deep learning-based piece of research software (Automated CaScoring, Siemens Healthineers) for CACS on non-contrast CT images [8]. This approach was based on a convolutional neural network trained on 2000 annotated datasets. As a result, the ML software correctly classified 93.2% of patients (476/511) into the same risk category as the human observers. ML methods were used to assess CACs from non-contrast-enhanced low-dose chest CT performed for lung cancer screening. In a 5973 non-contrast non-ECG gated chest CT scans dataset, a deep CNN was employed to extract the Agatston scores directly from these images [9]. The algorithm yielded a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.93 and correctly stratified 73% of cases into the corresponding risk category.
CTCA has become the first-line examination in detecting and quantifying coronary stenosis. It has shown excellent sensitivity and negative predictive value for coronary artery stenosis. Currently, the reporting is based on a subjective visual assessment by clinicians.
Van Hamersvelt et al. evaluated the added value of DL analysis of the LV myocardium (LVM) in coronary CT angiography (CCTA) overdetermination of the degree of the coronary stenosis for identification of patients with stress-induced ischemia [10]. Multiple AI techniques were used in this study; firstly, the LV myocardium was automatically segmented using a multiscale CNN. Afterwards, the algorithm unsupervised using a convolutional auto-encoder, LV myocardium, was characterized (encoded) on all CT slices. Finally, patients were classified with a support vector SVM to those with or without functionally significant coronary artery stenosis based on the extracted features. The proposed method improved discrimination (AUC = 0.76) compared to classification based on the determination of the coronary degree of stenosis only (AUC = 0.68). The proposed method’s sensitivity and specificity were 84.6% and 48.4%, respectively.
In the NXT trial (Heart Flow analysis of coronary blood flow using CT angiography: NeXt sTeps trial), 254 subjects underwent CCTA before invasive coronary angiography with fractional flow reserve (FFR), which was the reference standard [11]. The aim was to investigate the associations between coronary stenosis severity, semi-automated assessment of atherosclerotic plaques, derived fractional flow reserve (FFRCT) and lesion-specific ischemia (identified by FFR). An assessment of plaque characteristics was shown to improve the discrimination of lesion-specific ischemia compared with stenosis alone. In a sub-study, the same group investigated if machine learning integration of clinical data, quantitative stenosis and plaque metrics measured from CCT can effectively predict lesion-specific ischemia (identified by FFR) [12]. This combination improved the prediction of lesion-specific ischemia. The integrated ML ischemia risk score exhibited higher AUG (0.84) than individual CTA measures, including stenosis (0.76), low-density noncalcified plaque volume (0.77), total plaque volume (0.74), and pre-test likelihood of coronary artery disease (0.63); p < 0.006.
Kelm et al. used an ML algorithm to automatically identify, grade and classify coronary stenosis caused by calcified and non-calcified plaques [13]. Their random forest model was trained on 229 CTA volumes following centerline extraction and lumen segmentation. The model performed accurate stenosis identification and lumen cross-sectional area estimation, with an average processing time of 1.8 s per case.
Zreik et al. trained a recurrent CNN to detect coronary plaque accurately, determine its composition, and classify the coronary stenosis as obstructive or non-obstructive [14]. For the detection and characterization of coronary plaque, the method has achieved an accuracy of 0.77. For detection of stenosis and determination of its anatomical significance, the method has achieved an accuracy of 0.80.

3. AI in Cardiac MRI

After the acquisition of images acquisition, AI can be employed to check that all the acquired images fit a prescribed imaging standard for further processing or analysis. For example, in MRI, investigators have proposed the automatic detection of possible missing basal and apical slices [15], the location of the ascending or descending aorta [16], or the presence of potential interslice motion artefacts and complete heart coverage [17][18].
The assessment of EF is a part of cardiac MRI scan analysis, and a trained cardiologist needs up to 20 min to complete it. Therefore, a fully automated approach will greatly value interpreting images rapidly, preventing interobserver and intraobserver interpretation variance.
Xue et al. proposed a robust method for LV detection using the CNN [19]. The CNN models were trained by assembling 25,027 scans. The model with three classes (3CS) for background, LV, and RV, successfully detected the LV in 99.98% of all test cases.
Tan et al. successfully developed a fully automated neural network regression-based algorithm for segmentation of the LV in cardiac MRI, with full coverage from apex to base across all cardiac phases, utilizing both short-axis (SA) and long-axis (LA) scans [20]. First, a network was trained to automatically identify the myocardium and detect the centre of the cavity. Then another network was trained to estimate radii from the cavity centre, producing smooth epicardial and endocardial contours. A similar approach was proposed by Du et al., where a boundary regression was performed on both left and right ventricles on short-axis images producing contours instead of pixel classification [21].
Furthermore, Bernard et al. published an automated segmentation algorithm, achieving Dice similarity coefficients of 0.95, or better, when compared to manual tracing [22]. Fahmy et al. presented an algorithm based on deep convolutional neural (DCN) networks to automatically quantify LV mass and scar volume on late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) in patients with HCM [23].
Recently, increased interest has been noted in the novel field of radiomics. The term radiomics reflects a process of converting digital medical images into mineable high-dimensional data by extracting a high number of handcrafted quantitative imaging features based on a wide range of mathematical and statistical methods [24]. Radiomics can be an efficient tool for discriminating between hypertensive heart disease and HCM patients when radiomics is applied on T1 and T2 mapping [25].

4. AI in Nuclear Cardiac Imaging

Myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) by single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and positron emission tomography (PET) plays a crucial role in the diagnosis and management of CAD. In nuclear cardiology, AI models demonstrated the use of ML to improve diagnostic accuracy, identify perfusion defects and their location, and predict early revascularization. In nuclear cardiac imaging, an ML algorithm (LogitBoost) was proposed to predict those patients with suspected coronary artery disease in whom early revascularization can be effective [26]. 713 single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) correlating invasive angiography with 372 revascularization events was used. The prediction of revascularization by the ML algorithm was compared to the analysis by two experienced readers utilizing all imaging, quantitative, and clinical data. The AUC for the ML was similar to one reader and superior to the second reader.
DL was used to predict obstructive disease from SPECT MPI [27] automatically. A total of 1638 patients without known CAD, undergoing SPECT MPI and invasive coronary angiography were studied. AUC for disease prediction by DL was significantly higher than for the total perfusion deficit (0.80 vs. 0.78 per person and 0.76 vs. 0.73 per vessel). In addition, the time needed to evaluate a new patient with this model was <1 s.
Another study aimed to determine whether ANN might help to diagnose coronary artery disease [28]. The ANN was trained to classify potentially abnormal areas as true or false based on the nuclear cardiology expert interpretation of 1001 gated SPECT images. The diagnostic accuracy of the ANN was compared with 364 expert interpretations that served as the gold standard of abnormality for the validation study. The ANN identified stress defects better than nuclear cardiology experts (AUC = 0.92 vs. 0.82, respectively).

5. AI in Heart Failure

Sanchez-Martinez et al. showed that an unsupervised ML algorithm for analyzing left ventricular (LV) long-axis function at rest and exercise could facilitate the diagnosis of heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) [29]. Inan et al. showed that the telemonitoring of HF patients in combination with ML algorithms can assess compensated and decompensated HF states [30]. A Swedish study confirmed that ML algorithms could identify four phenotypes with different clinical courses and therapeutic responses [31].
Koulaouzidis et al. developed an algorithm for detecting patients at high risk of HF hospitalization, using daily collected physiological data (blood pressure, heart rate, weight) by non-invasive telemedicine [32]. The algorithm could identify such patterns and classify them as abnormal by assessing the predictive value of each of the monitored signals and their combinations using analysis of vectors (e.g., vectors of raw signal values, vectors of signals obtained by Multi-Resolution Analysis). The best predictive results were achieved with the combined used of weight and diastolic BP. The highest predictive performance was achieved using eight-day TM data (area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC) 0.82 ± 0.02).
Finally, the clinical response to cardiac resynchronization can be predicted using ML systems [33].

6. AI in Arrythmias

One of the most widespread applications of AI in cardiology is the prediction of cardiac arrhythmias. An effective ML-based methodology to classify ECG was proposed to predict the onset of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation [34]. The prediction performance of this algorithm was superior to the previously developed methods in terms of both the sensitivity and specificity, which was 100% and 95.5%, respectively. DL techniques have succeeded in detecting cardiac arrhythmia (17 classes) based on long-duration ECG signal analysis [35].
Attia et al. from the Mayo Clinic used paired 12-lead ECG and echocardiogram data, including the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) from 44,959 patients, to train a CNN to identify patients with ventricular dysfunction, defined as LVΕF ≤ 35%, using the ECG data alone [36]. When tested on an independent set of 52,870 patients, the network model yielded values for AUC, sensitivity, and specificity of 0.93, 86.3%, and 85.7%, respectively. In another study from the Mayo Clinic, a CNN was trained and validated using a digital 12-lead ECG from 2448 patients with a verified HCM diagnosis and 51,153 non-HCM age- and sex-matched control subjects [37]. The algorithm detected adult HCM patients from the ECG with an AUC of 0.96, a sensitivity of 87% and a specificity of 90%. The performance of the above-described algorithm was tested in a cohort of 300 children and >18,000 age- and sex-matched controls [38]. The results were impressive: the AUC of the model for HCM detection was 0.98, with 92% sensitivity and 95% specificity; positive predictive value (PPV) was 22%, and negative predictive value (NPV) was 99%. It tended to work better in adolescents than in small children.
Finally, Koulaouzidis et al. developed a statistical index based on the phase space reconstruction (PSR) of the ECG for the accurate and timely diagnosis of ventricular tachycardia (VT) and ventricular fibrillation (VF) [39].
Recently, a breakthrough technology, Cardio-HART™, was introduced. Using bio-signals enhanced with AI, it is possible to estimate echocardiographic-like findings (HART-findings), including structural, functional and hemodynamical abnormalities. Functional abnormalities mean systolic and diastolic dysfunction supported by measurements of LVEF, GLS, E/e’, LAVI and wall motion abnormalities. The detection of structural and functional cardiac abnormalities with promising performance supports the early detection of HF. Significantly, however, being bio-signal based, it can be used in primary care settings, since ECHO is only available in Secondary Care.
Cardio-HART™ is based on complementing ECG with phonocardiograph (PCG) and a novel bio-signal of a physiological nature (MCG), shows significantly higher sensitivity in detection of common heart diseases. AI make fusion of each bio-signals own strengths:
ECG—Electro-physiological abnormalities: arrhythmias, premature beats, atrioventricular blocks, bundle-branch blocks, etc.;
PCG—Hemodynamical diseases: valve stenosis, valve regurgitation, hypertension (arterial or pulmonary hypertension);
MCG—Mechano-physiological abnormalities: cardiomyopathy, myocarditis, myocardial infarction, ischemia, hypertrophies, atrial enlargements, systolic or diastolic dysfunction, or other wall motion problems;
The performance is summarized by using triple classification of the echocardiographic summary, where the middle category between Normal and Abnormal, called “Mild”, means that the patient has one or a few mild abnormalities, typically diastolic dysfunction with preserved LVEF and/or some asymptomatic heart enlargement or non-significant valve insufficiency. The ECG summary with its triple outcome is provided in statistics for comparison purposes: normal, borderline, and abnormal.

References

  1. Knackstedt, C.; Bekkers, S.C.; Schummers, G.; Schreckenberg, M. Fully Automated Versus Stand of Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction and Longitudinal Strain: The FAST-EFs Multicenter Study. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2015, 66, 1456–1466.
  2. Narula, S.; Shameer, K.; Salem Omar, A.M.; Dudley, J.T.; Sengupta, P.P. Machine-learning algorithms to automate morphological and functional assessments in 2D echocardiography. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2016, 68, 2287–2295.
  3. Zhang, J.; Gajjala, S.; Agrawal, P.; Tison, G.H.; Hallock, L.A.; Beussink-Nelson, L.; Lassen, M.H.; Fan, E.; Aras, M.A.; Jordan, C.; et al. Fully Automated Echocardiogram Interpretation in Clinical Practice. Circulation 2018, 138, 1623–1635.
  4. Moghaddasi, H.; Nourian, S. Automatic assessment of mitral regurgitation severity based on extensive textural features on 2D echocardiography videos. Comput. Biol. Med. 2016, 73, 47–55.
  5. Playford, D.; Bordin, E.; Mohamad, R.; Stewart, S.; Strange, G. Enhanced Diagnosis of Severe Aortic Stenosis Using Artificial Intelligence: A Proof-of-Concept Study of 530,871 Echocardiograms. JACC Cardiovasc. Imaging 2020, 13, 1087–1090.
  6. Agatston, A.S.; Janowitz, W.R.; Hildner, F.J.; Zusmer, N.R.; Viamonte, M.; Detrano, R. Quantifcation of coronary artery calcium using ultrafast computed tomography. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 1990, 15, 827–832.
  7. Wolterink, J.M.; Leiner, T.; de Vos, B.D.; van Hamersvelt, R.W.; Viergever, M.A.; Išgum, I. Automatic coronary artery calcium scoring in cardiac CT angiography using paired convolutional neural networks. Med. Image Anal. 2016, 34, 123–136.
  8. Martin, S.S.; van Assen, M.; Rapaka, S.; Hudson, H.T., Jr.; Fischer, A.M.; Varga-Szemes, A.; Sahbaee, P.; Schwemmer, C.; Gulsun, M.A.; Cimen, S.; et al. Evaluation of a deep learning-based automated CT coronary artery calcium scoring algorithm. JACC Cardiovasc. Imaging 2020, 13, 524–526.
  9. Cano-Espinosa, C.; Gonzalez, G.; Washko, G.R.; Cazorla, M.; Estepar, R.S.J. Automated Agatston score computation in non-ECG gated CT scans using deep learning. Proc. SPIE Int. Soc. Opt. Eng. 2018, 10574, 673–678.
  10. van Hamersvelt, R.W.; Zreik, M.; Voskuil, M.; Viergever, M.A.; Išgum, I.; Leiner, T. Deep learning analysis of left ventricular myocardium in CT angiographic intermediate-degree coronary stenosis improves the diagnostic accuracy for identification of functionally significant stenosis. Eur. Radiol. 2019, 29, 2350–2359.
  11. Gaur, S.; Øvrehus, K.A.; Dey, D.; Leipsic, J.; Bøtker, H.E.; Jensen, J.M.; Narula, J.; Ahmadi, A.; Achenbach, S.; Ko, B.S.; et al. Coronary plaque quantification and fractional flow reserve by coronary computed tomography angiography identify ischemia-causing lesions. Eur. Heart J. 2016, 37, 1220–1227.
  12. Dey, D.; Gaur, S.; Ovrehus, K.A.; Slomka, P.J.; Betancur, J.; Goeller, M.; Hell, M.M.; Gransar, H.; Berman, D.S.; Achenbach, S.; et al. Integrated prediction of lesion-specific ischemia from quantitative coronary CT angiography using machine learning: A multicentre study. Eur. Radiol. 2018, 28, 2655–2664.
  13. Kelm, B.M.; Mittal, S.; Zheng, Y.; Tsymbal, A.; Bernhardt, D.; Vega-Higuera, F.; Zhou, S.K.; Meer, P.; Comaniciu, D. Detection, grading and classification of coronary stenoses in computed tomography angiography. Med. Image Comput. Comput. Assist. Interv. 2011, 14, 25–32.
  14. Zreik, M.; Van Hamersvelt, R.W.; Wolterink, J.M.; Leiner, T.; Viergever, M.A.; Išgum, I. A Recurrent CNN for automatic detection and classification of coronary artery plaque and stenosis in coronary CT angiography. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 2019, 38, 1588–1598.
  15. Zhang, L.; Gooya, A.; Dong, B.; Hua, R.; Petersen, S.E.; Medrano-Gracia, P.; Frangi, A.F. Simulation and Synthesis in Medical Imaging; Tsaftaris, S.A., Gooya, A., Frangi, A.F., Prince, J.L., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2016; pp. 138–145.
  16. Biasiolli, L.; Hann, E.; Lukaschuk, E.; Carapella, V.; Paiva, J.M.; Aung, N.; Rayner, J.J.; Werys, K.; Fung, K.; Puchta, H.; et al. Automated localization and quality control of the aorta in cine CMR can significantly accelerate processing of the UK Biobank population data. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0212272.
  17. Tarroni, G.; Oktay, O.; Bai, W.; Schuh, A.; Suzuki, H.; Passerat-Palmbach, J.; De Marvao, A.; O’Regan, D.P.; Cook, S.; Glocker, B.; et al. Learning-based quality control for cardiac MR images. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 2019, 38, 1127–1138.
  18. Zhang, L.; Gooya, A.; Pereanez, M.; Dong, B.; Piechnik, S.K.; Neubauer, S.; Petersen, S.E.; Frangi, A.F. Automatic assessment of full left ventricular coverage in cardiac cine magnetic resonance imaging with fisher discriminative 3D CNN. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 2018, 66, 1975–1986.
  19. Xue, H.; Tseng, E.; Knott, K.D.; Kotecha, T.; Brown, L.; Plein, S.; Fontana, M.; Moon, J.C.; Kellman, P. Automated detection of left ventricle in arterial input function images for inline perfusion mapping using deep learning: A study of 15,000 patients. Magn. Reson. Med. 2020, 84, 2788–2800.
  20. Tan, L.K.; McLaughlin, R.A.; Lim, E.; Abdul Aziz, Y.F.; Liew, Y.M. Fully automated segmentation of the left ventricle in cine cardiac MRI using neural network regression. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2018, 48, 140–152.
  21. Du, X.; Zhang, W.; Zhang, H.; Chen, J.; Zhang, Y.; Warrington, J.C.; Brahm, G.; Li, S. Deep regression segmentation for cardiac bi-ventricle MR images. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 3828–3838.
  22. Bernard, O.; Lalande, A.; Zotti, C.; Cervenansky, F.; Yang, X.; Heng, P.A.; Cetin, I.; Lekadir, K.; Camara, O.; Ballester, M.A.G.; et al. Deep Learning Techniques for Automatic MRI Cardiac Multi-Structures Segmentation and Diagnosis: Is the Problem Solved? IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 2018, 37, 2514–2525.
  23. Fahmy, A.S.; Rausch, J.; Neisius, U.; Chan, R.H.; Maron, M.S.; Appelbaum, E.; Menze, B.; Nezafat, R. Automated cardiac MR scar quantification in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy using deep convolutional neural networks. JACC Cardiovasc. Imaging 2018, 11, 1917–1918.
  24. Gillies, R.J.; Kinahan, P.E.; Hricak, H. Radiomics: Images are more than pictures. Are Data Radiol. 2016, 278, 563–577.
  25. Baessler, B.; Luecke, C.; Lurz, J.; Klingel, K.; Das, A.; von Roeder, M.; de Waha-Thiele, S.; Besler, C.; Rommel, K.P.; Maintz, D.; et al. Cardiac MRI and Texture Analysis of Myocardial T1 and T2 Maps in Myocarditis with Acute versus Chronic Symptoms of Heart Failure. Radiology 2019, 292, 608–617.
  26. Arsanjani, R.; Dey, D.; Khachatryan, T.; Shalev, A.; Hayes, S.W.; Fish, M.; Nakanishi, R.; Germano, G.; Berman, D.S.; Slomka, P. Prediction of revascularization after myocardial perfusion SPECT by machine learning in a large population. J. Nucl. Cardiol. 2015, 22, 877–884.
  27. Betancur, J.; Commandeur, F.; Motlagh, M.; Sharir, T.; Einstein, A.J.; Bokhari, S.; Fish, M.B.; Ruddy, T.D.; Kaufmann, P.; Sinusas, A.J.; et al. Deep Learning for Prediction of Obstructive Disease from Fast Myocardial Perfusion SPECT. JACC Cardiovasc. Imaging 2018, 11, 1654–1663.
  28. Nakajima, K.; Kudo, T.; Nakata, T.; Kiso, K.; Kasai, T.; Taniguchi, Y.; Matsuo, S.; Momose, M.; Nakagawa, M.; Sarai, M.; et al. Diagnostic accuracy of an artificial neural network compared with statistical quantitation of myocardial perfusion images: A Japanese multicenter study. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging 2017, 44, 2280–2289.
  29. Sanchez-Martinez, S.; Duchateau, N.; Erdei, T.; Kunszt, G.; Aakhus, S.; Degiovanni, A.; Marino, P.; Carluccio, E.; Piella, G.; Fraser, A.G.; et al. Machine Learning Analysis of Left Ventricular Function to Characterize Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction. Circ. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2018, 11, e007138.
  30. Inan, O.T.; Baran Pouyan, M.; Javaid, A.Q.; Dowling, S.; Etemadi, M.; Dorier, A.; Heller, J.A.; Bicen, A.O.; Roy, S.; De Marco, T.; et al. Novel Wearable Seismocardiography and Machine Learning Algorithms Can Assess Clinical Status of Heart Failure Patients. Circ. Heart Fail. 2018, 11, e004313.
  31. Ahmad, T.; Lund, L.H.; Rao, P.; Ghosh, R.; Warier, P.; Vaccaro, B.; Dahlström, U.; O’Connor, C.M.; Felker, G.M.; Desai, N.R. Machine Learning Methods Improve Prognostication, Identify Clinically Distinct Phenotypes, and Detect Heterogeneity in Response to Therapy in a Large Cohort of Heart Failure Patients. J. Am. Heart Assoc. 2018, 7, e008081.
  32. Koulaouzidis, G.; Iakovidis, D.K.; Clark, A.L. Telemonitoring predicts in advance heart failure admissions. Int. J. Cardiol. 2016, 216, 78–84.
  33. Katz, D.H.; Deo, R.C.; Aguilar, F.G.; Selvaraj, S.; Martinez, E.E.; Beussink-Nelson, L.; Kim, K.Y.A.; Peng, J.; Irvin, M.R.; Tiwari, H.; et al. Phenomapping for the Identification of Hypertensive Patients with the Myocardial Substrate for Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction. J. Cardiovasc. Transl. Res. 2017, 10, 275–284.
  34. Ebrahimzadeh, E.; Kalantari, M.; Joulani, M.; Shahraki, R.S.; Fayaz, F.; Ahmadi, F. Prediction of paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: A machine learning based approach using combined feature vector and mixture of expert classification on HRV signal. Comput. Methods Programs Biomed. 2018, 165, 53–67.
  35. Budzianowski, J.; Hiczkiewicz, J.; Burchardt, P.; Pieszko, K.; Rzeźniczak, J.; Budzianowski, P.; Korybalska, K. Predictors of atrial fibrillation early recurrence following cryoballoon ablation of pulmonary veins using statistical assessment and machine learning algorithms. Heart Vessel. 2019, 34, 352–359.
  36. Attia, Z.I.; Kapa, S.; Lopez-Jimenez, F.; McKie, P.M.; Ladewig, D.J.; Satam, G.; Pellikka, P.A.; Enriquez-Sarano, M.; Noseworthy, P.A.; Munger, T.M.; et al. Screening for cardiac contractile dysfunction using an artificial intelligence-enabled electrocardiogram. Nat. Med. 2019, 25, 70–74.
  37. Ko, W.Y.; Siontis, K.C.; Attia, Z.I.; Carter, R.E.; Kapa, S.; Ommen, S.R.; Demuth, S.J.; Ackerman, M.J.; Gersh, B.J.; Arruda-Olson, A.M.; et al. Detection of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy using a convolutional neural network-enabled electrocardiogram. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2020, 75, 722–733.
  38. Siontis, K.C.; Liu, K.; Bos, J.M.; Attia, Z.I.; Cohen-Shelly, M.; Arruda-Olson, A.M.; Farahani, N.Z.; Friedman, P.A.; Noseworthy, P.A.; Ackerman, M.J. Detection of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy by an artificial intelligence electrocardiogram in children and adolescents. Int. J. Cardiol. 2021, 340, 42–47.
  39. Koulaouzidis, G.; Das, S.; Cappiello, G.; Mazomenos, E.B.; Maharatna, K.; Puddu, P.E.; Morgan, J. Prompt and accurate diagnosis of ventricular arrhythmias with a novel index based on phase space reconstruction of ECG. Int. J. Cardiol. 2015, 182, 38–43.
More
Information
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register : , , , , ,
View Times: 562
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 22 Jul 2022
1000/1000
Video Production Service