Using a Convolutional Neural Network and Convolutional Long Short-term Memory to Automatically Detect Aneurysms on 2D Digital Subtraction Angiography Images: Framework Development and Validation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is hard to distinguish cerebral aneurysms from overlapping vessels in 2D digital subtraction angiography (DSA) images due to these images' lack of spatial information. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to (1) construct a deep learning diagnostic system to improve the ability to detect posterior communicating artery aneurysms on 2D DSA images and (2) validate the efficiency of the deep learning diagnostic system in 2D DSA aneurysm detection. METHODS: We proposed a 2-stage detection system. First, we established the region localization stage to automatically locate specific detection regions of raw 2D DSA sequences. Second, in the intracranial aneurysm detection stage, we constructed a bi-input+RetinaNet+convolutional long short-term memory (C-LSTM) framework to compare its performance for aneurysm detection with that of 3 existing frameworks. Each of the frameworks had a 5-fold cross-validation scheme. The receiver operating characteristic curve, the area under the curve (AUC) value, mean average precision, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were used to assess the abilities of different frameworks. RESULTS: A total of 255 patients with posterior communicating artery aneurysms and 20 patients without aneurysms were included in this study. The best AUC values of the RetinaNet, RetinaNet+C-LSTM, bi-input+RetinaNet, and bi-input+RetinaNet+C-LSTM frameworks were 0.95, 0.96, 0.92, and 0.97, respectively. The mean sensitivities of the RetinaNet, RetinaNet+C-LSTM, bi-input+RetinaNet, and bi-input+RetinaNet+C-LSTM frameworks and human experts were 89% (range 67.02%-98.43%), 88% (range 65.76%-98.06%), 87% (range 64.53%-97.66%), 89% (range 67.02%-98.43%), and 90% (range 68.30%-98.77%), respectively. The mean specificities of the RetinaNet, RetinaNet+C-LSTM, bi-input+RetinaNet, and bi-input+RetinaNet+C-LSTM frameworks and human experts were 80% (range 56.34%-94.27%), 89% (range 67.02%-98.43%), 86% (range 63.31%-97.24%), 93% (range 72.30%-99.56%), and 90% (range 68.30%-98.77%), respectively. The mean accuracies of the RetinaNet, RetinaNet+C-LSTM, bi-input+RetinaNet, and bi-input+RetinaNet+C-LSTM frameworks and human experts were 84.50% (range 69.57%-93.97%), 88.50% (range 74.44%-96.39%), 86.50% (range 71.97%-95.22%), 91% (range 77.63%-97.72%), and 90% (range 76.34%-97.21%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: According to our results, more spatial and temporal information can help improve the performance of the frameworks. Therefore, the bi-input+RetinaNet+C-LSTM framework had the best performance when compared to that of the other frameworks. Our study demonstrates that our system can assist physicians in detecting intracranial aneurysms on 2D DSA images.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".