Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (Mar 2022)

Precision measurement of cardiac structure and function in cardiovascular magnetic resonance using machine learning

  • Rhodri H. Davies,
  • João B. Augusto,
  • Anish Bhuva,
  • Hui Xue,
  • Thomas A. Treibel,
  • Yang Ye,
  • Rebecca K. Hughes,
  • Wenjia Bai,
  • Clement Lau,
  • Hunain Shiwani,
  • Marianna Fontana,
  • Rebecca Kozor,
  • Anna Herrey,
  • Luis R. Lopes,
  • Viviana Maestrini,
  • Stefania Rosmini,
  • Steffen E. Petersen,
  • Peter Kellman,
  • Daniel Rueckert,
  • John P. Greenwood,
  • Gabriella Captur,
  • Charlotte Manisty,
  • Erik Schelbert,
  • James C. Moon

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12968-022-00846-4
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 24, no. 1
pp. 1 – 11

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Measurement of cardiac structure and function from images (e.g. volumes, mass and derived parameters such as left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction [LVEF]) guides care for millions. This is best assessed using cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR), but image analysis is currently performed by individual clinicians, which introduces error. We sought to develop a machine learning algorithm for volumetric analysis of CMR images with demonstrably better precision than human analysis. Methods A fully automated machine learning algorithm was trained on 1923 scans (10 scanner models, 13 institutions, 9 clinical conditions, 60,000 contours) and used to segment the LV blood volume and myocardium. Performance was quantified by measuring precision on an independent multi-site validation dataset with multiple pathologies with n = 109 patients, scanned twice. This dataset was augmented with a further 1277 patients scanned as part of routine clinical care to allow qualitative assessment of generalization ability by identifying mis-segmentations. Machine learning algorithm (‘machine’) performance was compared to three clinicians (‘human’) and a commercial tool (cvi42, Circle Cardiovascular Imaging). Findings Machine analysis was quicker (20 s per patient) than human (13 min). Overall machine mis-segmentation rate was 1 in 479 images for the combined dataset, occurring mostly in rare pathologies not encountered in training. Without correcting these mis-segmentations, machine analysis had superior precision to three clinicians (e.g. scan-rescan coefficients of variation of human vs machine: LVEF 6.0% vs 4.2%, LV mass 4.8% vs. 3.6%; both P < 0.05), translating to a 46% reduction in required trial sample size using an LVEF endpoint. Conclusion We present a fully automated algorithm for measuring LV structure and global systolic function that betters human performance for speed and precision.

Keywords