Clinical hemorheology and microcirculation · 2024
Performance evaluation of two different software programs for automated ASPECTS scoring in patients with suspected stroke.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
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.
Río Bártulos Carolina, Pirl Lukas, Lier Dennis, Planert Mathis, Hohmann Juliane, El Mountassir Abdelouahed, El Anwar Mohamed, Wiggermann Philipp
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The range of software available to radiologists has increased enormously with the advancement of AI. A good example of this is software to determine ASPECTS in the treatment of potential stroke patients.
OBJECTIVE: In this study, two software packages (eASPECTS from Brainomix and VIA_ASPECTS from Siemens) were tested and compared for their performance in the daily clinical routine of a maximum care provider with a 24/7 stroke unit.
METHODS: A total of 637 noncontrast CT images were obtained from consecutive patients with suspected stroke, of whom 73 were finally diagnosed with MCA infarction. Differences in agreement and quantification of agreement were analysed, as well as the correlation and sensitivity, specificity and accuracy compared to raters.
RESULTS: Compared to VIA_ASPECTS, eASPECTS shows good agreement and strong correlation with the raters. VIA_ASPECTS has lower accuracy and low specificity than eASPECTS but a higher sensitivity.
CONCLUSION: Both software products have the potential to be decision support tools for radiologists. There are, however, differences between the two software products in terms of their intended use.
OBJECTIVE: In this study, two software packages (eASPECTS from Brainomix and VIA_ASPECTS from Siemens) were tested and compared for their performance in the daily clinical routine of a maximum care provider with a 24/7 stroke unit.
METHODS: A total of 637 noncontrast CT images were obtained from consecutive patients with suspected stroke, of whom 73 were finally diagnosed with MCA infarction. Differences in agreement and quantification of agreement were analysed, as well as the correlation and sensitivity, specificity and accuracy compared to raters.
RESULTS: Compared to VIA_ASPECTS, eASPECTS shows good agreement and strong correlation with the raters. VIA_ASPECTS has lower accuracy and low specificity than eASPECTS but a higher sensitivity.
CONCLUSION: Both software products have the potential to be decision support tools for radiologists. There are, however, differences between the two software products in terms of their intended use.