Abstract
Background
Point-of-care lung ultrasound (LUS) allows real-time patient scanning to help diagnose pleural effusion (PE) and plan further investigation and treatment. LUS typically requires training and experience from the clinician to accurately interpret the images. To address this limitation, we previously demonstrated a deep-learning model capable of detecting the presence of PE on LUS at an accuracy greater than 90%, when compared to an experienced LUS operator.
Methods
This follow-up study aimed to develop a deep-learning model to provide segmentations for PE in LUS. Three thousand and forty-one LUS images from twenty-four patients diagnosed with PE were selected for this study. Two LUS experts provided the ground truth for training by reviewing and segmenting the images. The algorithm was then trained using ten-fold cross-validation. Once training was completed, the algorithm segmented a separate subset of patients.
Results
Comparing the segmentations, we demonstrated an average Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC) of 0.70 between the algorithm and experts. In contrast, an average DSC of 0.61 was observed between the experts.
Point-of-care lung ultrasound (LUS) allows real-time patient scanning to help diagnose pleural effusion (PE) and plan further investigation and treatment. LUS typically requires training and experience from the clinician to accurately interpret the images. To address this limitation, we previously demonstrated a deep-learning model capable of detecting the presence of PE on LUS at an accuracy greater than 90%, when compared to an experienced LUS operator.
Methods
This follow-up study aimed to develop a deep-learning model to provide segmentations for PE in LUS. Three thousand and forty-one LUS images from twenty-four patients diagnosed with PE were selected for this study. Two LUS experts provided the ground truth for training by reviewing and segmenting the images. The algorithm was then trained using ten-fold cross-validation. Once training was completed, the algorithm segmented a separate subset of patients.
Results
Comparing the segmentations, we demonstrated an average Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC) of 0.70 between the algorithm and experts. In contrast, an average DSC of 0.61 was observed between the experts.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Article number | 274 |
Pages (from-to) | 1-14 |
Number of pages | 14 |
Journal | BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making |
Volume | 23 |
Issue number | 2023 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 29 Nov 2023 |