Background: Quantification of myocardial blood flow (MBF) is used for the noninvasive diagnosis of patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). This study compared traditional statistics, machine learning, and deep learning techniques in their ability to diagnose disease using only the rest and stress MBF values.

Methods: This study included 3245 rest and stress rubidium-82 positron emission tomography (PET) studies and matching diagnostic labels from perfusion reports. Standard logistic regression, lasso logistic regression, support vector machine, random forest, multilayer perceptron, and dense U-Net were compared for per-patient detection and per-vessel localization of scars and ischemia.

Results: Receiver-operator characteristic area under the curve (AUC) of machine learning models was significantly higher than those of traditional statistics models for per-patient detection of disease (0.92-0.95 vs. 0.87) but not for per-vessel localization of ischemia or scar. Random forest showed the highest AUC = 0.95 among the different models compared. On the final hold-out set for generalizability, random forest showed an AUC of 0.92 for detection and 0.89 for localization of perfusion abnormalities.

Conclusions: For per-vessel localization, simple models trained on segmental data performed similarly to a convolutional neural network trained on polar-map data, highlighting the need to justify the use of complex predictive algorithms through comparison with simpler methods.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclcard.2024.101797DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

random forest
12
per-vessel localization
12
deep learning
8
learning models
8
ischemia scar
8
myocardial blood
8
blood flow
8
positron emission
8
emission tomography
8
traditional statistics
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!