4.6 Article

Deep Learning Multi-Domain Model Provides Accurate Detection and Grading of Mucosal Ulcers in Different Capsule Endoscopy Types

期刊

DIAGNOSTICS
卷 12, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics12102490

关键词

machine learning; capsule endoscopy; Crohn's disease

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this study was to create an accurate combined algorithm for identifying ulcers on CE images from two different capsules. The separate models for each capsule type achieved excellent accuracy, while the cross-domain model had a wider range of accuracy. The combined model provided high and consistent diagnostic accuracy, making it essential for the development of AI models in clinical practice.
Background and Aims: The aim of our study was to create an accurate patient-level combined algorithm for the identification of ulcers on CE images from two different capsules. Methods: We retrospectively collected CE images from PillCam-SB3 ' s capsule and PillCam-Crohn's capsule. ML algorithms were trained to classify small bowel CE images into either normal or ulcerated mucosa: a separate model for each capsule type, a cross-domain model (training the model on one capsule type and testing on the other), and a combined model. Results: The dataset included 33,100 CE images: 20,621 PillCam-SB3 images and 12,479 PillCam-Crohn's images, of which 3582 were colonic images. There were 15,684 normal mucosa images and 17,416 ulcerated mucosa images. While the separate model for each capsule type achieved excellent accuracy (average AUC 0.95 and 0.98, respectively), the cross-domain model achieved a wide range of accuracies (0.569-0.88) with an AUC of 0.93. The combined model achieved the best results with an average AUC of 0.99 and average mean patient accuracy of 0.974. Conclusions: A combined model for two different capsules provided high and consistent diagnostic accuracy. Creating a holistic AI model for automated capsule reading is an essential part of the refinement required in ML models on the way to adapting them to clinical practice.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据