TY - JOUR T1 - Deep learning-based end-to-end automated stenosis classification and localization on catheter coronary angiography JF - medRxiv DO - 10.1101/2021.03.05.21252217 SP - 2021.03.05.21252217 AU - Chao Cong AU - Yoko Kato AU - Henrique D. Vasconcellos AU - Mohammad R. Ostovaneh AU - Joao A.C. Lima AU - Bharath Ambale-Venkatesh Y1 - 2021/01/01 UR - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/03/08/2021.03.05.21252217.abstract N2 - Background Automatic coronary angiography (CAG) assessment may help in faster screening and diagnosis of patients. Current CNN-based vessel-segmentation suffers from sampling imbalance, candidate frame selection, and overfitting; few have shown adequate performance for CAG stenosis classification. We aimed to provide an end-to-end workflow that may solve these problems.Methods A deep learning-based end-to-end workflow was employed as follows: 1) Candidate frame selection from CAG videograms with CNN+LSTM network, 2) Stenosis classification with Inception-v3 using 2 or 3 categories (<25%, >25%, and/or total occlusion) with and without redundancy training, and 3) Stenosis localization with two methods of class activation map (CAM) and anchor-based feature pyramid network (FPN). Overall 13744 frames from 230 studies were used for the stenosis classification training and 4-fold cross-validation for image-, artery-, and per-patient-level. For the stenosis localization training and 4-fold cross-validation, 690 images with >25% stenosis were used.Results Our model achieved an accuracy of 0.85, sensitivity of 0.96, and AUC of 0.86 in per-patient level stenosis classification. Redundancy training was effective to improve classification performance. Stenosis position localization was adequate with better quantitative results in anchor-based FPN model, achieving global-sensitivity for LCA and RCA of 0.68 and 0.70 with mean square error (MSE) values of 39.3 and 37.6 pixels respectively, in the 520 × 520 pixel image.Conclusion A fully-automatic end-to-end deep learning-based workflow that eliminates the vessel extraction and segmentation step was feasible in coronary artery stenosis classification and localization on CAG images.Key PointsThe fully-automatic, end-to-end workflow which eliminated the vessel extraction and segmentation step for supervised-learning was feasible in the stenosis classification on CAG images, achieving an accuracy of 0.85, sensitivity of 0.96, and AUC of 0.86 in per-patient level.The redundancy training improved the AUC values, accuracy, F1-score, and kappa score of the stenosis classification.Stenosis position localization was assessed in two methods of CAM-based and anchor-based models, which performance was acceptable with better quantitative results in anchor-based models.Summary Statement A fully-automatic end-to-end deep learning-based workflow which eliminated the vessel extraction and segmentation step was feasible in the stenosis classification and localization on CAG images. The redundancy training improved the stenosis classification performance.Competing Interest StatementDr. Joao A.C. Lima reports receipt of grant support from Canon Medical Systems.Clinical TrialNCT00934037Funding StatementThis study was supported by Master Research Agreement 09-115 and Artificial Intelligence Health Information Exchange (AIHEX).Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The original CORE320 study was approved by central and at 16 local institutional review boards (IRBs) which are listed below. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants as presented in the original CORE320 papers. (Clinical trial design paper by Vavere et al. Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography 2011; 5: 370-381. Original study paper by Rochitte et al. European Heart Journal 2014; 35: 1120-30.) Given the retrospective and ancillary nature of the data, the current study is covered by the original CORE320 study IRB. List of the central and the 16 local institutional IRBs of the original CORE320 study: The central IRB: Johns Hopkins School of Medicine (Study Chair: Joao AC Lima, MD MBA) The local IRBs (16 centers): 1. United States (4 sites) Johns Hopkins School of Medicine(PI: Joao A. C. Lima, MD) National Heart Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI)(PI: Andrew E. Arai, MD) Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (PI: Roger Laham, MD) Brigham and Women Hospital (PI: Frank J. Rybicki, MD) 2. Brazil (2 sites) Albert Einstein Hospital (PI: Cesar Nomura, MD) INCOR Heart Institute University-Sao Paulo (PI: Carlos E. Rochitte, MD, PhD) 3. Canada (1 site) Toronto General Hospital (PI: Narinder Paul, MD) 4. Denmark (1 site) Rigshospitalet - University of Copenhagen (PI: Klaus F. Kofoed, MD) 5. Germany (1 site) Charite Humboldt University(PI: Marc Dewey, MD, PhD) 6. Japan (4 sites) Iwate Medical University (PI: Kunihiro Yoshioka, MD) Keio University (PI: Sachio Kuribyashi, MD) St. Luke's International Hospital (PI: Hiroyuki Niinuma, MD, PhD) Mie University (PI: Hajime Sakuma, MD) 7. Netherlands (1 site) Leiden University (PI: Joanne D. Schuijf, PhD) 8. Singapore (2 sites) Mount Elizabeth Hospital (PI: John Hoe, MD) National Heart Center(PI: Tan Swee Yaw, MD) All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. ER -