4.5 Article

Use of Convolutional Neural Networks to Evaluate Auricular Reconstruction Outcomes for Microtia

期刊

LARYNGOSCOPE
卷 133, 期 9, 页码 2413-2416

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/lary.30499

关键词

artificial intelligence; machine learning; microtia; outcomes; reconstructive surgery

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed to determine the feasibility of using machine learning for objective assessment of aesthetic outcomes in auricular reconstructive surgery. By utilizing convolutional neural networks, images were analyzed and assigned percent scores based on confidence of classification, showing potential for objective evaluation of surgical outcomes.
ObjectivesThe objective of this study is to determine whether machine learning may be used for objective assessment of aesthetic outcomes of auricular reconstructive surgery.MethodsImages of normal and reconstructed auricles were obtained from internet image search engines. Convolutional neural networks were constructed to identify auricles in 2D images in an auto-segmentation task and to evaluate whether an ear was normal versus reconstructed in a binary classification task. Images were then assigned a percent score for normal ear appearance based on confidence of the classification.ResultsImages of 1115 ears (600 normal and 515 reconstructed) were obtained. The auto-segmentation task identified auricles with 95.30% accuracy compared to manually segmented auricles. The binary classification task achieved 89.22% accuracy in identifying reconstructed ears. When the confidence of the classification was used to assign percent scores to normal appearance, the reconstructed ears were classified to a range of 2% (least like normal ears) to 98% (most like normal ears).ConclusionImage-based analysis using machine learning can offer objective assessment without the bias of the patient or the surgeon. This methodology could be adapted to be used by surgeons to assess quality of operative outcome in clinical and research settings.Level of Evidence4 Laryngoscope, 2022

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

4.5
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