A Deep Learning Pipeline for Assessing Ventricular Volumes from a Cardiac MRI Registry of Patients with Single Ventricle Physiology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose To develop an end-to-end deep learning (DL) pipeline for automated ventricular segmentation of cardiac MRI data from a multicenter registry of patients with Fontan circulation (Fontan Outcomes Registry Using CMR Examinations [FORCE]). Materials and Methods This retrospective study used 250 cardiac MRI examinations (November 2007–December 2022) from 13 institutions for training, validation, and testing. The pipeline contained three DL models: a classifier to identify short-axis cine stacks and two U-Net 3+ models for image cropping and segmentation. The automated segmentations were evaluated on the test set (n = 50) by using the Dice score. Volumetric and functional metrics derived from DL and ground truth manual segmentations were compared using Bland-Altman and intraclass correlation analysis. The pipeline was further qualitatively evaluated on 475 unseen examinations. Results There were acceptable limits of agreement (LOA) and minimal biases between the ground truth and DL end-diastolic volume (EDV) (bias: −0.6 mL/m2, LOA: −20.6 to 19.5 mL/m2) and end-systolic volume (ESV) (bias: −1.1 mL/m2, LOA: −18.1 to 15.9 mL/m2), with high intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs > 0.97) and Dice scores (EDV, 0.91 and ESV, 0.86). There was moderate agreement for ventricular mass (bias: −1.9 g/m2, LOA: −17.3 to 13.5 g/m2) and an ICC of 0.94. There was also acceptable agreement for stroke volume (bias: 0.6 mL/m2, LOA: −17.2 to 18.3 mL/m2) and ejection fraction (bias: 0.6%, LOA: −12.2% to 13.4%), with high ICCs (>0.81). The pipeline achieved satisfactory segmentation in 68% of the 475 unseen examinations, while 26% needed minor adjustments, 5% needed major adjustments, and in 0.4%, the cropping model failed. Conclusion The DL pipeline can provide fast standardized segmentation for patients with single ventricle physiology across multiple centers. This pipeline can be applied to all cardiac MRI examinations in the FORCE registry. Keywords: Cardiac, Adults and Pediatrics, MR Imaging, Congenital, Volume Analysis, Segmentation, Quantification Supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 2023
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
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".