Can Large Language Models Guide Aortic Stenosis Management? A Comparative Analysis of ChatGPT and Gemini AI.

OBJECTIVE

Management of aortic stenosis (AS) requires integrating complex clinical, imaging, and risk stratification data. Large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT and Gemini AI have shown promise in healthcare, but their performance in valvular heart disease, particularly AS, has not been thoroughly assessed. This study systematically compared ChatGPT and Gemini AI in addressing guideline-based and clinical scenario questions related to AS.

METHOD: Forty open-ended AS-related questions were developed, comprising 20 knowledge-based and 20 clinical scenario items based on the 2021 European Society of Cardiology/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (ESC/EACTS) guidelines. Both models were queried independently. Responses were evaluated by two blinded cardiologists using a structured 4-point scoring system. Composite scores were categorized, and comparisons were performed using Wilcoxon signed-rank and chi-square tests.

RESULTS

Gemini AI achieved a significantly higher mean overall score than ChatGPT (3.96 +- 0.17 vs. 3.56 +- 0.87; P = 0.003). Fully guideline-compliant responses were more frequent with Gemini AI (95.0%) than with ChatGPT (72.5%), although the overall compliance distribution difference did not reach conventional significance (P = 0.067). Gemini AI performed more consistently across both question types. Inter-rater agreement was excellent for ChatGPT (κ = 0.94) and moderate for Gemini AI (κ = 0.66).

CONCLUSION

Gemini AI demonstrated superior accuracy, consistency, and guideline adherence compared to ChatGPT. While LLMs show potential as adjunctive tools in cardiovascular care, expert oversight remains essential, and further model refinement is needed before clinical integration, particularly in AS management.