MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1089/end.2023.0717

Медицинская библиотека · Journal of endourology · 2024

Can Artificial Intelligence Accurately Detect Urinary Stones? A Systematic Review.

Panthier Frédéric, Melchionna Alberto, Crawford-Smith Hugh, Phillipou Yiannis, Choong Simon, Arumuham Vimoshan, Allen Sian, Allen Clare, Smith Daron

СтатьяСистематический обзорПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

Objectives

To perform a systematic review on artificial intelligence (AI) performances to detect urinary stones.

Methods

A PROSPERO-registered (CRD473152) systematic search of Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and PubMed databases was performed to identify original research articles pertaining to AI stone detection or measurement, using search terms ("automatic" OR "machine learning" OR "convolutional neural network" OR "artificial intelligence" OR "detection" AND "stone volume"). Risk-of-bias (RoB) assessment was performed according to the Cochrane RoB tool, the Joanna Briggs Institute Checklist for nonrandomized studies, and the Checklist for Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging (CLAIM).

Results

Twelve studies were selected for the final review, including three multicenter and nine single-center retrospective studies. Eleven studies completed at least 50% of the CLAIM checkpoints and only one presented a high RoB. All included studies aimed to detect kidney (5/12, 42%), ureter (2/12, 16%), or urinary (5/12, 42%) stones on noncontrast computed tomography (NCCT), but 42% intended to automate measurement. Stone distinction from vascular calcification interested two studies. All studies used AI machine learning network training and internal validation, but a single one provided an external validation. Trained networks achieved stone detection, with sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy rates ranging from 58.7% to 100%, 68.5% to 100%, and 63% to 99.95%, respectively. Detection Dice score ranged from 83% to 97%. A high correlation between manual and automated stone volume (r = 0.95) was noted. Differentiate distal ureteral stones and phleboliths seemed feasible.

Conclusions

AI processes can achieve automated urinary stone detection from NCCT. Further studies should provide urinary stone detection coupled with phlebolith distinction and an external validation, and include anatomical abnormalities and urologic foreign bodies (ureteral stent and nephrostomy tubes) cases.

Для цитирования: Panthier Frédéric, Melchionna Alberto, Crawford-Smith Hugh, Phillipou Yiannis, Choong Simon, Arumuham Vimoshan, Allen Sian, Allen Clare, Smith Daron. Can Artificial Intelligence Accurately Detect Urinary Stones? A Systematic Review.. Journal of endourology. 2024. DOI: 10.1089/end.2023.0717.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.