MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406992901 · doi:10.1161/str.56.suppl_1.tp171

Abstract TP171: Automated Large Vessel Occlusions Detection: Improved Diagnostic Accuracy in MCA M2 Segment Using Deep Learning

2025· article· en· W4406992901 on OpenAlexaff
Angelo Franciosini, Christophe Avare, Peter Chang, Daniel Chow, Christopher G. Filippi, Angela Ayobi, Vladimir Laletin, Yasmina Chaibi

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDeep learningArtificial intelligenceRadiologyStroke (engine)CardiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Integrating AI into clinical practice enables precise diagnosis and could potentially enhance outcomes for patients with large vessel occlusion (LVO). Although advancements in AI have shown promise in enhancing diagnostic accuracy, several studies have reported very low sensitivities when including MCA-M2 occlusions, resulting in unbalanced performance across different LVO segments. Therefore, continuous retraining and evaluation of these evolving technologies in clinical settings are essential. This study aims to analyze the real-world performance of the latest version of an FDA-approved and CE-marked AI software for LVO detection in computed tomography angiograms (CTAs), specifically designed to provide balanced performance across all LVO segments. Methods: This retrospective, multicenter, multinational, and blinded study analyzed anonymized CTA scans from 7 clinical sources across Europe and the USA, acquired using 40 scan models from 5 different CT vendors. The improved version of CINA-LVO (Avicenna.AI, La Ciotat, France) uses deep learning to accurately detect ICA, MCA-M1 and proximal MCA-M2 without impairment, specifically with MCA-M2 segments. Its diagnostic performance was assessed against the ground truth, which was determined through the consensus of three US board-certified senior neuroradiologists who analyzed each LVO segment. Results: A total of 557 scans (mean age 66.2 ± 20.5 [SD] years old, 50.3% female, 49.0% positive for LVO) were included. Overall sensitivity and specificity including M2 occlusions (all 557 cases) were 93.8% (95%CI: 90.2%-96.3%) and 91.2% (95%CI: 87.3%-94.2%), respectively. The PPV and NPV were 91.1% and 93.8%, respectively (see Table 1). Moreover, the detection accuracy for LVO exceeded 90% across all LVO segments, including the proximal and distal internal carotid artery and the M1 and proximal M2 segments of the middle cerebral artery (see Table 2). There were no statistically significant differences between the accuracy of each LVO segment (p-value>0.05). Conclusions: Unlike previous studies, our results demonstrate balanced performance across all LVO segments, with no impairment in diagnostic accuracy from the inclusion of M2 occlusions in the analysis. These promising findings suggest that the integration of continuously improved AI tools into clinical practice could substantially enhance clinical workflow and diagnostic accuracy for patients with LVO.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.292 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStroke→Same topicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics→French-language works237,207→