Preview

Medical Visualization

Advanced search

Using an artificial intelligence algorithm to assess the bone mineral density of the vertebral bodies based on computed tomography data

https://doi.org/10.24835/1607-0763-1257

Abstract

Goal: To develop a method for automated assessment of the volumetric bone mineral density (BMD) of the vertebral bodies using an artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm and a phantom modeling method.

Materials and Methods: Evaluation of the effectiveness of the AI algorithm designed to assess BMD of the vertebral bodies based on chest CT data. The test data set contains 100 patients aged over 50 y.o.; the ratio between the subjects with/without compression fractures (Сfr) is 48/52. The X-ray density (XRD) of vertebral bodies at T11-L3 was measured by experts and the AI algorithm for 83 patients (205 vertebrae). We used a recently developed QCT PK (Quantitative Computed Tomography Phantom Kalium) method to convert XRD into BMD followed by building calibration lines for seven 64-slice CT scanners. Images were taken from 1853 patients and then processed by the AI algorithm after the calibration. The male to female ratio was 718/1135.

Results: The experts and the AI algorithm reached a strong agreement when comparing the measurements of the XRD. The coefficient of determination was R2=0.945 for individual vertebrae (T11-L3) and 0.943 for patients (p=0.000). Once the subjects from the test sample had been separated into groups with/without Сfr, the XRD data yielded similar ROC AUC values for both the experts – 0.880, and the AI algorithm – 0.875. When calibrating CT scanners using a phantom containing BMD samples made of potassium hydrogen phosphate, the following averaged dependence formula BMD =0.77*HU-1.343 was obtained. Taking into account the American College Radiology criteria for osteoporosis, the cut-off value of BMD<80 mg/ml was 105.6HU; for osteopenia BMD<120 mg/ml was 157.6HU. During the opportunistic assessment of BMD in patients aged above 50 years using the AI algorithm, osteoporosis was detected in 31.72% of female and 18.66% of male subjects.

Conclusions: This paper demonstrates good comparability for the measurements of the vertebral bodies’ XRD performed by the AI morphometric algorithm and the experts. We presented a method and demonstrated great effectiveness of opportunistic assessment of vertebral bodies’ BMD based on computed tomography data using the AI algorithm and the phantom modeling.

About the Authors

Z. R. Artyukova
Research and Practical Clinical Center for Diagnostics and Telemedicine Technologies of the Moscow Health Care Department
Russian Federation

Zlata R. Artyukova – Junior Researcher of the Department of Innovation Technology

24, Petrovka str., Moscow 127051


Competing Interests:

No conflict of interest



N. D. Kudryavtsev
Research and Practical Clinical Center for Diagnostics and Telemedicine Technologies of the Moscow Health Care Department
Russian Federation

Nikita D. Kudryavtsev – Junior Researcher of the Department of Innovation Technology

24, Petrovka str., Moscow 127051


Competing Interests:

No conflict of interest



A. V. Petraikin
Research and Practical Clinical Center for Diagnostics and Telemedicine Technologies of the Moscow Health Care Department
Russian Federation

Alexey V. Petraikin – Doct. of Sci. (Med.), Associate Professor, Chief Researcher of the Department of Innovation Technology

24, Petrovka str., Moscow 127051


Competing Interests:

No conflict of interest



L. R. Abuladze
Research and Practical Clinical Center for Diagnostics and Telemedicine Technologies of the Moscow Health Care Department
Russian Federation

Liya R. Abuladze – Junior Researcher of the Department of Innovation Technology

24, Petrovka str., Moscow 127051


Competing Interests:

No conflict of interest



A. K. Smorchkova
Research and Practical Clinical Center for Diagnostics and Telemedicine Technologies of the Moscow Health Care Department
Russian Federation

Anastasia K. Smorchkova – Junior Researcher of the Department of Innovation Technology 

24, Petrovka str., Moscow 127051


Competing Interests:

No conflict of interest



E. S. Akhmad
Research and Practical Clinical Center for Diagnostics and Telemedicine Technologies of the Moscow Health Care Department
Russian Federation

Ekaterina S. Akhmad – Researcher of the Department of Innovation Technology 

24, Petrovka str., Moscow 127051


Competing Interests:

No conflict of interest



D. S. Semenov
Research and Practical Clinical Center for Diagnostics and Telemedicine Technologies of the Moscow Health Care Department
Russian Federation

Dmitry S. Semenov – Head of the Sector Standardization and Quality Control of the Department of Innovation Technology 

24, Petrovka str., Moscow 127051


Competing Interests:

No conflict of interest



M. G. Belyaev
IRA Labs, Inc.
Russian Federation

Mikhail G. Belyaev – Doct. of Sci. (Phys.-Math.), Professor, CEO

Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology (Skoltech); 30-1, Bolshoy Boulevard, Moscow 121205


Competing Interests:

No conflict of interest



Zh. E. Belaya
The National Medical Research Centre for Endocrinology
Russian Federation

Zhanna E. Belaya – Doct. of Sci. (Med.), Chief Researcher, Head of Department of Neuroendocrinology and Bone Disease

11b, Dmitry Ulyanov str., Moscow 117292


Competing Interests:

No conflict of interest



A. V. Vladzimirskyy
Research and Practical Clinical Center for Diagnostics and Telemedicine Technologies of the Moscow Health Care Department, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation (Sechenov University)
Russian Federation

Anton V. Vladzimirskyy – Doct. of Sci. (Med.), Associate director of Science, Research and Practical Clinical Center for Diagnostics and Telemedicine Technologies; Professor at Information and Internet Technologies Chair, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University)

24, Petrovka str., Moscow 127051; 
8, bld. 2, Trubetskaya str., Moscow 119991


Competing Interests:

No conflict of interest



Yu. A. Vasiliev
Research and Practical Clinical Center for Diagnostics and Telemedicine Technologies of the Moscow Health Care Department
Russian Federation

Yuri A. Vasiliev – Cand. of Sci. (Med.), СEO

24, Petrovka str., Moscow 127051


Competing Interests:

No conflict of interest



References

1. Belaya Z.E., Belova K.Yu., Biryukova E.V. et al. Federal clinical guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and prevention of osteoporosis. Osteoporosis and Bone Diseases. 2021; 24 (2): 4-47. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.14341/osteo12930

2. Brown J.K., Timm W., Bodeen G. et al. Asynchronously Calibrated Quantitative Bone Densitometry. J. Clin. Densitom. 2017; 20 (2): 216–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocd.2015.11.001

3. Petraikin A.V., Skripnikova I.A. Quantitative Computed Tomography, modern data. Review. Medical Visualization. 2021; 25 (4): 134-146. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24835/1607-0763-1049

4. ISCD Official Positions – Adult – International Society for Clinical Densitometry. Available at https://iscd.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/2019-Official-Positions-Adult-1.pdf Accessed August 20, 2022

5. Alacreu E., Moratal D., Arana E. Opportunistic screening for osteoporosis by routine CT in Southern Europe. Osteoporos. Int. 2017. 28; (3): 983–990. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-016-3804-3

6. Jang S., Graffy P.M., Ziemlewicz T. J. et al. Opportunistic osteoporosis screening at routine abdominal and Thoracic CT: Normative L1 trabecular attenuation values in more than 20 000 adults. Radiology. 2019; 291 (2): 360–367. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2019181648

7. Savage R.H. van Assen M., Martin S. S. et al. Utilizing Artificial Intelligence to Determine Bone Mineral Density Via Chest Computed Tomography. J. Thorac. Imaging. 2020; 35 (1): S35-S39. https://doi.org/10.1097/RTI.0000000000000484.

8. Tang C. Zhang, W., Li, H. et al. CNN-based qualitative detection of bone mineral density via diagnostic CT slices for osteoporosis screening. Osteoporos Int. 2021; 32: 971–979. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-020-05673-w

9. Pickhardt P.J., Lee S.J., Liu J. et al. Population-based opportunistic osteoporosis screening: Validation of a fully automated CT tool for assessing longitudinal BMD changes. Br J Radiol. 2019; 92 (1094): 20180726. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20180726

10. Löffler, M.T., Jacob, A., Scharr, A. et al. Automatic opportunistic osteoporosis screening in routine CT: improved prediction of patients with prevalent vertebral fractures compared to DXA. Eur Radiol. 2021; 31: 6069–6077. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-07655-2

11. Valentinitsch, A., Trebeschi, S., Kaesmacher, J. et al. Opportunistic osteoporosis screening in multi-detector CT images via local classification of textures. Osteoporos Int. 2019; 30: 1275–1285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-019-04910-1

12. Bar A., Wolf L., Amitai O. B. et al. Compression fractures detection on CT. Medical Imaging 2017: Computer-Aided Diagnosis. SPIE, 2017; 10134: 1013440. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1706.01671

13. Tomita N., Cheung Y.Y., Hassanpour S. Deep neural networks for automatic detection of osteoporotic vertebral fractures on CT scans. Comput. Biol. Med. 2018; 98: 8–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2018.05.011.

14. Pisov M., Kondratenko V., Zakharov A. et al. Keypoints Localization for Joint Vertebra Detection and Fracture Severity Quantification. Martel, A.L., et al. (eds.) MICCAI 2020. LNCS, 2020; 12266: 723–732. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-59725-2_70

15. Lesnyak O.M., Noroi L. The Eastern European & Central Asian Regional Audit Epidemiology, costs & burden of osteoporosis in 2010. 2011. (In Russ.).Available at https://www.osteoporosis.foundation/sites/iofbonehealth/files/201906/2010_Eastern_European_Central_Asian_Audit_Russian.pdf Accessed August 20, 2022

16. Cheng X., Zhao K., Zha X. et al. Opportunistic Screening Using Low‐Dose CT and the Prevalence of Osteoporosis in China: A Nationwide, Multicenter Study. J Bone Miner Res. 2021; 36 (3): 427-435. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.4187

17. Petraikin A.V., Smoliarchuk M.Y., Petryaykin F.A., et al. Assessment the Accuracy of Densitometry Measurements Using DMA PP2 Phantom. Traumatology and Orthopedics of Russia. 2019; 25 (3): 124-134. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21823/2311-2905-2019-25-3-124-134

18. Morozov S.P., Vladzymyrskyy A.V., Ledikhova N.V. et al. Moscow experiment on computer vision in radiology: involvement and participation of radiologists. Information technologies for the Physician. 2020; 4, 14–23. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.37690/1811-0193-2020-4-14-23

19. Andreychenko A.E., Logunova T.A., Gombolevskiy V.A. et al. A methodology for selection and quality control of the radiological computer vision deployment at the megalopolis scale. medRxiv. 2022: 2022.02.12.22270663. https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.02.12.22270663

20. Genant H.K., Wu C. Y., Kuijket C.V. al. Vertebral fracture assessment using a semiquantitative technique. J. Bone Miner. 1993; 8 (9): 1137–1148. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.5650080915.

21. The American College of Radiology. ACR–SPR–SSR Practice Parameter for the Performance of Musculoskeletal Quantitative Computed Tomography (Qct). Published 2018. https://www.acr.org/-/media/ACR/Files/Practice-Parameters/QCT.pdf Accessed August 20, 2022

22. Petraikin A.V., Smorchkova A.K., Kudryavtsev N.D. et al. Comparison of two asynchronous QCT methods. Medical Visualization. 2020; 24( 4): 108-118. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24835/1607-0763-2020-4-108-118

23. Pavlov N.A., Andreychenko A.E., Vladzymyrskyy A.V. et al. Reference medical datasets (MosMedData) for independent external evaluation of algorithms based on artificial intelligence in diagnostics. Digital Diagnostics. 2021; 2 (1): 49−65. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17816/DD60635

24. Petraikin A.V., Belaya Z.E., Kiseleva A.N. et al. Artificial intelligence for diagnosis of vertebral compression fractures using a morphometric analysis model, based on convolutional neural networks. Problems of Endocrinology. 2020; 66 (5): 48-60. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.14341/probl12605

25. Lee, S.J., Binkley, N., Lubner, M.G. et al. Opportunistic screening for osteoporosis using the sagittal reconstruction from routine abdominal CT for combined assessment of vertebral fractures and density. Osteoporos Int. 2016; 27: 1131–1136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-015-3318-4

26. Pickhardt P.J., Pooler B. D., Lauder T.et al. Opportunistic screening for osteoporosis using abdominal computed tomography scans obtained for other indications. Ann. Intern. Med. 2013; 158 (8): 588–595. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-158-8-201304160-00003

27. Kanis J.A. Assessment of fracture risk and its application to screening for postmenopausal osteoporosis: Synopsis of a WHO report. Osteoporos. Int. 1994; 6 (4): 368–381. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01622200


Supplementary files

Review

For citations:


Artyukova Z.R., Kudryavtsev N.D., Petraikin A.V., Abuladze L.R., Smorchkova A.K., Akhmad E.S., Semenov D.S., Belyaev M.G., Belaya Zh.E., Vladzimirskyy A.V., Vasiliev Yu.A. Using an artificial intelligence algorithm to assess the bone mineral density of the vertebral bodies based on computed tomography data. Medical Visualization. 2023;27(2):125-137. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24835/1607-0763-1257

Views: 937


ISSN 1607-0763 (Print)
ISSN 2408-9516 (Online)