Diagnostic accuracy in coronary CT angiography analysis: artificial intelligence versus human assessment
James K Min,
Paul Knaapen,
Nick S Nurmohamed,
Erik S G Stroes,
Andrew D Choi,
Ibrahim Danad,
James Earls,
Michiel J Bom,
Ruben W de Winter,
Rachel Bernardo,
Ruurt Jukema,
Ralf Sprengers
Affiliations
James K Min
2 Radiology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York City, New York, USA
Paul Knaapen
1 Department of Cardiology, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Nick S Nurmohamed
Department of Cardiology, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Erik S G Stroes
Department of Vascular Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Andrew D Choi
Division of Cardiology and Department of Radiology, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, District of Columbia, USA
Ibrahim Danad
1 Department of Cardiology, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
James Earls
Cleerly Health, New York, New York, USA
Michiel J Bom
Department of Cardiology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
Ruben W de Winter
1 Department of Cardiology, Amsterdam Cardiovascular Sciences, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Rachel Bernardo
Division of Cardiology and Department of Radiology, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, District of Columbia, USA
Ruurt Jukema
Department of Cardiology, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Ralf Sprengers
Department of Radiology, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Background Visual assessment of coronary CT angiography (CCTA) is time-consuming, influenced by reader experience and prone to interobserver variability. This study evaluated a novel algorithm for coronary stenosis quantification (atherosclerosis imaging quantitative CT, AI-QCT).Methods The study included 208 patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing CCTA in Perfusion Imaging and CT Coronary Angiography With Invasive Coronary Angiography-1. AI-QCT and blinded readers assessed coronary artery stenosis following the Coronary Artery Disease Reporting and Data System consensus. Accuracy of AI-QCT was compared with a level 3 and two level 2 clinical readers against an invasive quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) reference standard (≥50% stenosis) in an area under the curve (AUC) analysis, evaluated per-patient and per-vessel and stratified by plaque volume.Results Among 208 patients with a mean age of 58±9 years and 37% women, AI-QCT demonstrated superior concordance with QCA compared with clinical CCTA assessments. For the detection of obstructive stenosis (≥50%), AI-QCT achieved an AUC of 0.91 on a per-patient level, outperforming level 3 (AUC 0.77; p<0.002) and level 2 readers (AUC 0.79; p<0.001 and AUC 0.76; p<0.001). The advantage of AI-QCT was most prominent in those with above median plaque volume. At the per-vessel level, AI-QCT achieved an AUC of 0.86, similar to level 3 (AUC 0.82; p=0.098) stenosis, but superior to level 2 readers (both AUC 0.69; p<0.001).Conclusions AI-QCT demonstrated superior agreement with invasive QCA compared to clinical CCTA assessments, particularly compared to level 2 readers in those with extensive CAD. Integrating AI-QCT into routine clinical practice holds promise for improving the accuracy of stenosis quantification through CCTA.